I! 


|  in 


LVf 


j#J7£RSJTY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
DAVIS 


COPY  OF  MECKLENBURG  DECLARATION  OF  INDEPENDENCE,  SIGNED  MAY  20. 1715. 


^^ 


•V&W-J^ ^  S^.fi-ts^k^-'f  '  ^»  -  iiX  ••-"£•     A^^*£^    ^-«**-0,    <*.^>    ^  ^t-tt****^  jfrjtLouc^***^ 

7»»**L*~~^^ite*  ^^%,  —  — -^.  •  r*-  tr^.  cr^  ^ 


t,-».-».y        ,*  ^f^,^ty  f^-^f"          -*«^.        ^"   «JL,<^»       <--<J  ^-(t*^**^     ^S5»7.M...i     A^C^-^MK'T  ^^  *: 

//^^A   >*5X  /^    x-A   £r^~£^      JJ&     At^^  /^^^^^^^^^'^^ 
l^tt,  <*-  ^  c^^f^^cs,^    C^>.  f^,'~^^>   ^  V  , .-<•„ ...  «^*^f    /t    ^-^^ 


^SXx-t^ 

'<,y 


A  SOUVENIR 
OF  THE  1ITTH  ANNIVERSARY,  CELEBRATED  AT  CHARLOTTE,  N.  C,,  MAY  18, 19, 20, 1892. 

A  fraudulent  facsimile  lithograph  of  the  alleged  original  Declaration. 


A  Study   of  Evidence  Showing  rh*<    the    Alleged   Early 
Declaration  of  Independent..?  ^     vf---.  kv'u-jfg; 

County,  North  Ciin.'h"rv,it     ^i    ,'vt^'-        :*h, 

1775,    |S    >;U;;-'Mi" 


a  BidmuUO  Iof.i1  .v^IIr,?-       A  -iM  v 


JUD  »w        ns  bos 


lo 


G.   P.   PUTNAM'S    SON 

NEW    YORK    AND    LUN'iK> 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CAJ.IFGRJ 


m  DECLARATION  OF  INDEPENDENT  SIGNED  M  20, 177 


A  fraudulent  facsimile  lithograph  of  the  alleged  original 

declaration. 

(Kindly  loaned  by  Mr  A.S.  Saliey,Jr.,of  Cojumbia,  S.C. ) 
The  declaration  was  written  in  imitation  of  Ephraim 

Brevard's  handwriting,  and  the  signatures  were  cut  from  the 

court  records  of  Mecklenburg  County. 


ATED  AT  CHARLOTTE,  M 


:i'Kf\  original  Declafftliot 


A  Study  of  Evidence  Showing  that   the  Alleged  Early 

Declaration  of  Independence  by  Mecklenburg 

County,  North  Carolina,  on   May   2Oth, 

1775,  is  Spurious 


BY 

William  Henry  Hoyt,  A,  M. 


G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS 

NEW    YORK    AND    LONDON 

Gbe   "Knickerbocker  press 

1907 


LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 


COPYRIGHT,  1907 

BY 
WILLIAM  KENRY  HOYT 


PREFACE 

SINCE  it  was  first  brought  to  the  attention  of  the 
general  public  in  the  year  1819,  the  declaration  of 
independence  which  is  alleged  to  have  been  issued 
on  May  20,  1775,  by  a  convention  held  in  Charlotte* 
Mecklenburg  County,  North  Carolina,  has  been  the 
subject  of  the  most  mooted  question  and  acrimo 
nious  controversy  of  the  history  of  the  Ameri 
can  Revolution.  Evidences  dating  from  1775  and 
onward  of  a  document  of  this  nature,  copies  of 
doubtful  origin  of  the  document  in  question,  a  copy 
written  from  memory  in  1800,  testimony  of  reliable 
persons  who  stated  between  1819  and  1 830  that  they 
had  been  spectators  and  participants  at  a  meeting 
which  adopted  it,  and  traditions  are  cited  to  prove 
the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the  Mecklen 
burg  Declaration  of  Independence.  In  1830,  after 
the  publication  of  the  trenchant  letter  of  Thomas 
Jefferson  expressing  his  belief  that  the  paper  was  a 
fabrication,  the  Legislature  of  North  Carolina  took 
up  the  matter,  and  afHrmed  the  Mecklenburg  Dec 
laration  to  be  genuine  and  authentic.  To-day,  in 
North  Carolina,  it  is  engrafted  upon  the  statute 
books,  the  date  it  bears  is  emblazoned  upon  the 
great  seal  of  the  State,  and  the  anniversary  of  its 

iii 


iv  Preface 

alleged  promulgation  is  observed  by  legislative  en 
actment.  The  consensus  of  opinion  of  critical 
students  of  American  history  is  opposed  to  its 
authenticity ;  but  from  the  beginning  of  the  con 
troversy  there  have  been  two  hostile  camps,  each 
fortified  by  what  are  regarded  as  unanswerable 
arguments.  If  this  verdict  be  reversed,  we  must 
conclude,  contrary  to  long-accepted  views,  and  with 
the  older  British  historians,  that  before  May,  1775, 
there  was  a  conscious  movement  in  the  colonies  hav 
ing  independence  as  its  aim,  and  we  must  admit 
that  some  of  the  most  striking  expressions  of  Jef 
ferson's  immortal  document  of  thirteen  months 
later  were  borrowed  from  the  Mecklenburg  mani 
festo.  Herein  lies  the  chief  historical  importance 
of  the  question. 

Because  of  the  absence  of  new  evidence  of  im 
portance  there  has  been  comparatively  little  discus 
sion  of  the  perplexing  problem  since  the  centennial 
celebration  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  at 
Charlotte  in  1875.  Renewed  interest  was  awakened 
by  the  publication  in  July,  1905,  of  a  facsimile  of 
the  disputed  document  as  it  appeared  in  what  pur 
ported  to  be  a  long-lost  copy  of  the  Cape-Fear 
Mercitry,  a  colonial  newspaper  in  which  it  is  said  to 
have  been  printed.  The  paper  was  soon  shown  to  be 
a  forgery  by  the  advocates  as  well  as  by  the  oppo 
nents  of  the  authenticity  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declar 
ation.  Interest  has  been  accentuated  and  general 
acceptance  of  the  declaration  rendered  seemingly 
imminent  by  Dr.  George  W.  Graham's  elaborate 
presentation  of  the  arguments  for  its  authenticity 


Preface  v 

and  by  new  light  of  much  significance  which  late 
researches  by  those  who  uphold  the  claims  of  Meck 
lenburg  have  brought  to  bear  upon  the  subject. 

The  purpose  of  this  monograph  is  to  show  that 
all  the  evidence,  new  and  old,  which  is  cited  in  sup 
port  of  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration,  should  be  understood  as 
relating  to  a  series  of  resolves  of  similar  import, 
which  were  adopted  in  Mecklenburg  County  May 
31,  1775,  and  that  the  several  versions  of  the  sup 
posititious  paper  of  May  20,  1775,  trace  their  origin 
to  rough  notes  written  from  memory  in  1800  by 
John  McKnitt  Alexander,  who  believed  those  re 
solves  to  be  a  declaration  of  independence  and  at 
tempted  to  set  forth  their  substance.  In  preparing 
the  work  I  have  gone  to  original  sources  of  infor 
mation  wherever  it  has  been  possible.  Hitherto 
inaccessible  manuscripts  are  adduced  to  demon 
strate  the  origin  of  the  famous  resolutions  of 
May  20,  1775,  and  the  successive  stages  of  their 
construction. 

Unfortunately  for  the  cause  of  historic  truth,  the 
enthusiasm  of  local  pride  and  patriotism  in  North 
Carolina,  where  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration, 
vouched  for,  as  it  is,  by  the  personal  testimony  of 
North  Carolina  patriots  of  the  Revolution,  has  been 
regarded  with  peculiar  veneration  for  close  upon  a 
hundred  years ;  the  charges  of  plagiarism  against 
Thomas  Jefferson  and  of  forgery  against  John  Mc 
Knitt  Alexander ;  the  disappearance  of  the  Cape- 
Fear  Mercury  from  the  British  State  Paper  Office 
in  1837  under  circumstances  which  would  seem 


vi  Preface 

to  indicate  that  Jefferson's  defenders  destroyed 
evidence  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration ;  and, 
finally,  the  fact  that  the  reputed  signers  of  this 
declaration  were  all,  or  nearly  all,  members  of 
one  religious  denomination,  have  each  added  fuel 
to  the  fires  of  controversy  and  contributed  to  pro 
duce  an  intolerant  spirit  which  has  been  a  bane 
to  sober  discussion.  As  it  was  in  1853  and  in  1873, 
when  Charles  Phillips  and  Daniel  R.  Goodloe  were 
the  first  North  Carolinians  since  an  unknown  gladia 
tor  of  1830  who  ventured  to  dispute  the  authenticity 
of  the  paper  of  May  20,  1775,  it  is  inevitable  to-day 
that  a  publication  which  discredits  the  proudest 
page  in  the  history  of  North  Carolina  should  en 
gender  in  some  quarters  an  unkindly  feeling  for  its 
author.  In  discharging  my  ungrateful  office,  I 
write  simply  as  a  student  of  history,  inspired  with  a 
special  love  for  the  history  of  the  "  Old  North 
State,"  and  with  a  profound  veneration  for  the 
Mecklenburg  patriots  of  1775.  I  came  to  my  sub 
ject  before  Dr.  George  W.  Graham's  book  was  an 
nounced  with  the  intention  of  writing  a  defence  of 
the  authenticity  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration, 
but  the  irresistible  logic  of  facts  drove  me  to  my 
present  position. 

For  the  first  incentive  to  undertake  this  work  and 
for  advice  and  encouragement  during  its  prepara 
tion,  I  am  under  an  obligation  to  Prof.  Samuel  F. 
Emerson,  of  the  University  of  Vermont,  which  it  is 
a  pleasure  to  acknowledge  here.  Some  of  the  ma 
terials  which  I  have  used  were  unearthed  by  Mr.  A. 
S.  Salley,  Jr.,  Secretary  of  the  Historical  Commission 


Preface  vii 

of  South  Carolina,  and  published  during  the  past 
year  in  a  series  of  articles  contributed  by  him  to  the 
Charleston  News  and  Courier.  For  courtesies  ex 
tended  to  me  while  collecting  materials  my  ac 
knowledgments  are  due  to  Messrs.  B.  F.  Stevens 
and  Brown,  of  London,  the  Earl  of  Dartmouth,  Dr. 
William  C.  Lane,  Librarian  of  Harvard  University, 
Dr.  Kemp  P.  Battle,  of  the  University  of  North 
Carolina,  Dr.  Reuben  G.  Thwaites,  of  the  State  His 
torical  Society  of  Wisconsin,  Dr.  Stephen  B.  Weeks, 
of  San  Carlos,  Arizona,  Mr.  Edward  P.  Moses,  of 
Raleigh,  N.  C.,  Mr.  Waldo  G.  Leland,  of  the  Car 
negie  Institution,  Mr.  Victor  H.  Paltsitts,  of  the 
New  York  Public  Library,  and  Mrs.  C.  S.  Coles, 
of  Washington,  D.  C.  I  have  also  to  thank  Mr. 
Salley  for  reading  the  proofs  of  the  book  and  for 
many  valuable  suggestions. 

W.  H.  H. 
BURLINGTON,  VT., 
September  2,  1906. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I 

PAGE 

HISTORY  OF  THE  CONTROVERSY. 

Causes  that  led  to  the  exhuming  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  (1817-19).  Jefferson  and  Adams  believe  it 
to  be  spurious  (1819).  The  incredulous  are  silenced  by 
surviving  witnesses.  Jefferson's  opinion  becomes  known 
(1829)  and  the  Legislature  of  North  Carolina  publishes 
testimony  (1830-31).  Contemporaneous  evidence  of 
such  a  document  discovered  (1833).  Jefferson  openly 
accused  of  plagiarism  (1837).  May  3ist  resolves  found 
(1838)  after  all  survivors  had  passed  away  and  said  to 
be  the  ones  they  remembered.  Dr.  Hawks  testifies 
(1852)  that  the  Martin  copy  was  obtained  before  1800. 
It  is  learned  (1853)  that  the  Da  vie  copy  was  written 
from  memory  in  1800.  The  fact  long  ignored.  Dr. 
Graham  argues  (1895,  1905)  that  the  May  3ist  resolves 
were  never  adopted 1-21 

CHAPTER  II 


Genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the  May  3ist  resolves 
proved  by  their  publication  in  Charleston  and  New-Bern 
newspapers.  In  effect,  a  declaration  of  independence, 
and  might  have  been  remembered  as  such  .  .  .22-31 

CHAPTER  III 

THE  RIVAL  DECLARATIONS  COMPARED. 

Both  papers, if  authentic, were  adopted  by  the  Committee 
of  the  County  of  Mecklenburg.  The  May  3ist  resolves 
ignored,  annulled,  and  effected  in  a  milder  way  all  that 


x  Contents 

PAGE 

is  alleged  to  have  been  done  and  unanimously  approved 
eleven  days  earlier.  Survivors  remembered  only  one 
such  document,  which  was  not  suppressed  or  superseded.  32—40 

CHAPTER  IV 

THE  LOST  "CAPE-FEAR  MERCURY." 

Gov.  Martin's  statements,  the  only  records  of  1775  that 
support  the  Declaration.  Though  well  informed  his 
proclamation  of  June  16,  1775,  shows  no  knowledge  of 
it.  Ignorance  of  Whig  leaders  on  June  2ist  and  their 
loyalty  revealed  by  the  Wilmington  "Association", 
and  reply  to  his  proclamation.  On  June  3oth  he  dis 
patched  to  England  a  newspaper  containing  Mecklen 
burg  resolutions  and  the  reply  to  his  proclamation. 
Fallacious  arguments  to  prove  that  Jefferson's  defenders 
stole  it  in  183  7.  The  May  3  ist  resolves  sent  in  the  dupli 
cate  dispatch  instead  of  the  newspaper.  Which  was 
the  Cape-Fear  Mercury  of  June  23,  1775.  The  resolves 
positively  identified  and  the  Governor's  ignorance  of 
others  ascertained  by  his  subsequent  statements.  Tories 
of  Mecklenburg  protest  against  the  May  3ist  resolves 
alone.  Gov.  Wright,  Cogdell,  and  Johnston  each  leave 
records  of  the  May  31  st  resolves  alone  ....  41-62 

CHAPTER  V 

CAPTAIN  JACK'S  MISSION  TO  PHILADELPHIA. 

Conflicting  testimony  of  the  witnesses  and  Gov.  Martin 
as  to  which  resolves  were  sent  to  Philadelphia.  Gov. 
Martin  sustained  by  the  Salisbury  records.  Inconsist 
ency  of  the  answers  of  the  Continental  Congress  and 
North  Carolina  delegates,  if  made  to  the  Declaration, 
with  their  professions  of  allegiance.  Impossibility  of  its 
concealment  by  the  delegates,  and  Adams's  and  Jeffer 
son's  testimony.  True  story  of  Capt.  Jack's  mission 
disclosed  by  the  important  relation  of  the  May  3ist  re 
solves  to  the  political  situation  in  the  colonies.  And  by 
their  suppression  in  Philadelphia 63—82 

CHAPTER  VI 

THE  SALISBURY  RECORDS. 

The  Declaration  not  known  in   Salisbury  eleven  days 


Contents  xi 

PAGE 

after  its  alleged  promulgation.  Other  circumstances 
that  can  be  explained  only  by  connecting  its  story  with 
the  May  3ist  resolves 83-87 

CHAPTER  VII 


Subsequent  conduct  of  reputed  "signers":  Kennon 
practises  in  the  King's  courts;  Avery  appointed  Attor 
ney  for  the  Crown;  Abraham,  Hezekiah,  and  Adam 
Alexander,  Irwin,  Barry  and  Foard  administer  justice 
for  Mecklenburg  in  the  King's  name;  Polk,  John  Mc- 
Knitt  Alexander,  Phifer,  Avery,  and  Kennon  formally 
acknowledge  allegiance  in  the  Hillsboro  Congress ;  every 
"true  friend  to  liberty"  does  so  in  Mecklenburg.  Argu 
ments  answered :  reconciliation  the  aim  of  the  Hillsboro 
Congress ;  membership  in  it  not  improper  for  the  authors 
of  the  May  3  ist  resolves ;  Whigs  and  Tories  deny  that  the 
idea  of  independence  took  root  in  North  Carolina  before 
1776.  Summary  of  facts  established  by  contempo 
raneous  records  88-103 


CHAPTER  VIII 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  MYTH. 


Independent  spirit  of  the  May  3ist  resolves.  Called  a 
declaration  of  independence  by  many  writers.  Like 
measures  looked  upon  before  July  4,  1776,  as  equivalent 
to  independence.  How  their  provisional  character  was 
forgotten.  Early  evidence  of  the  myth:  "A  Modern 
Poem"  (1777) — the  Swain  copy  probably  fraudulent; 
the  Moravian  record  (1783);  Charlotte  deeds  which  date 
independence  from  1775 — uncertainty  of  their  signifi 
cance.  Date  of  May  20,  1775,  not  part  of  the  myth  be 
fore  1800 104-124 


CHAPTER  IX 


THE  DAVIE  COPY. 


Bancroft  obtained  reproductions  of  two  papers  certified 
by  "J.  McKnitt"  to  be  those  from  which  he  copied  in 
1819.  Their  internal  evidence  shows  that  Alexander's 
notes  were  written  from  memory  in  1800  or  soon  after 
wards,  and  were  the  rudiments  of  the  second  paper. 


xii  Contents 

PAGB 

"J.  McKnitt'-  certified  the  latter  to  be  the  same  as  the 
Da  vie  copy,  and  Alexander  certified  the  Davie  copy  to 
have  been  written  from  memory  in  1800.  Comparison 
of  his  notes  with  the  May  3ist  resolves  proves  that  he 
tried  to  write  their  substance.  The  Davie  prototype 
partly,  if  not  wholly,  the  work  of  the  unknown  writer. 
Answers  to  Prof.  Phillips's  charges  of  fraud  against  "  J. 
McKnitt."  Alexander  told  his  story  to  many  persons 
after  1800,  and  the  date  which  he  recollected  thus  be 
came  known  125-173 

CHAPTER  X 

THE  MARTIN  AND  GARDEN  COPIES. 

Martin  a  voluminous  writer,  an  unreliable  historian,  and 
in  his  dotage  when  he  told  Dr.  Hawks  that  he  obtained 
his  copy  prior  to  1800.  Internal  evidence  of  his  book 
shows  that  the  resolutions  and  accompanying  narrative 
were  inserted  after  its  completion.  Col.  Polk  wrote  for 
Judge  Murphey  in  1819  a  narrative  containing  reso 
lutions  procured  from  "J.  McKnitt."  Its  publication 
by  Murphey  in  amended  form  proved  by  the  MS.  and 
his  correspondence.  Its  republication  by  Martin 
proved  by  comparing  his  narrative  and  resolutions  with 
Polk's.  The  fact  confirmed  by  the  Garden,  Murphey, 
and  "Guilford"  narratives.  And  by  allusions  to  Mur 
phey  in  Martin's  preface 174-201 

CHAPTER  XI 

THE  TESTIMONY  OF  WITNESSES. 

Probable  cause  of  the  suppression  of  the  certificate  to  the 
Davie  paper.  Difficulties  and  prepossessions  under 
which  the  witnesses  testified.  Yet  the  majority  remem 
bered  terms  peculiar  to  the  May  3ist  resolves.  Their 
testimony  to  the  date  of  May  20,  1775,  of  no  value. 
They  contradict  Alexander's  recollection  as  to  who  sum 
moned  the  meeting  and  who  acted  as  secretary.  Un 
warrantable  alteration  of  the  Alexander  MSS.  caused 
thereby.  Story  of  the  signing  of  the  Declaration  prob 
ably  unfounded 202-221 


Contents  xiii 

APPENDIX 

PAGE 

A.  COLONEL  FOLK'S  TRANSCRIPT  OF  THE  DOCUMENT  PRE 

PARED  BY  "J.  McKNITT"  FROM  HIS  FATHER'S  PAPERS 
AND    PUBLISHED    WITH    EMENDATIONS    IN    THE    Raleigh 

Register,  APRIL  30,  1819 225-229 

B.  THE  STATE  PAMPHLET 230-270 

C.  THE  MECKLENBURG  RESOLVES  AS  PRINTED  IN  THE  North- 

Carolina  Gazette  OF  JUNE  16,  1775,  NO.  323    .        .        271-275 

D.  TRANSCRIPT  OF  THE  MECKLENBURG  RESOLVES  IN  THE 

Cape-Fear  Mercury  OF  JUNE  23,  1775,  SENT  IN  GOVER 
NOR  MARTIN'S  DUPLICATE  LETTER  OF  JUNE  30,  1775     276-280 

E.  COLONEL  WILLIAM  FOLK'S  ACCOUNT  OF  FIRST  REVOLU 

TIONARY  MOVEMENTS  IN  NORTH  CAROLINA    .          .          281-284 


ILLUSTRATIONS 

A  fraudulent  facsimile  lithograph  of  the  alleged  original 

declaration  ........         Frontispiece 

(Kindly  lent  by  Mr.  A.  S.  Salley,  Jr.) 

The  spurious    Cape-Fear  Mercury,    Friday,    June    3rd, 

1775     .         ....        •         •  •         •         .  facing^ 

(By  permission  of  the  Macmillan  Co.) 

Bancroft's  copy  of  the  "  torn  half  sheet "  in  John  McKnitt 
Alexander's  handwriting  from  which  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  was  constructed  (6  plates)  facing  1 26,  127,  128, 129,  130,  131 

The  Bancroft  copyist's  description  of  the  "  sheet"  in  an 
"unknown  handwriting  "  from  which  the  publication 
of  1819  was  copied  (3  plates)  ....  facing  132,  133,  134 

Copy  of  the  certificate  attached  by  Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt 
Alexander  to  the  anonymous  manuscript  and  his 
father's  (2  plates) facing  135,  136 


The  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  of  Independence 

CHAPTER   I 

HISTORY  OF  THE  CONTROVERSY 

THE  publication  of  William  Wirt's  Life  of  Pat 
rick  Henry  in  1817,  in  which  Wirt  claimed  that 
Patrick  Henry  "  gave  the  first  impulse  to  the  ball 
of  the  Revolution,"  was  followed  by  a  discussion 
as  to  whether  the  earliest  movements  that  led  to 
American  independence  took  place  in  Virginia  or 
in  Massachusetts.  During  the  winter  of  1818-19, 
when  the  subject  was  a  topic  of  conversation 
at  Washington  among  members  of  Congress,  the 
assertion  was  there  made  that  the  people  of 
Mecklenburg  county,  in  North  Carolina,  formally 
declared  themselves  independent  of  Great  Britain 
before  the  4th  of  July,  I7/6.1  The  statement  was 

1  C.  Tait  to  Gen.  P.  Jack,  January  25,  1819,  in  The  Address  of  the  Hon. 
Wm.  A.  Graham  on  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Independence,  delivered 
at  Charlotte,  February  4,  1875  (cited  hereafter  as  Gov.  Graham's  Address), 
113-114  ;  and  correspondence  of  John  Adams  (  Works,  x.)  and  of  Thomas 
Jefferson  (  Writings •,  Ford  ed.,  x.)  during  the  year  1818. 

I 


2  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

apparently  received  with  incredulity.  For  satis 
factory  information  relative  to  the  matter  two  of 
the  North  Carolina  members,  Senator  Nathaniel 
Macon  and  William  Davidson,  the  representative 
from  the  Mecklenburg  district,  wrote  to  persons 
in  that  section  of  the  country.  Davidson,  who  had 
probably  brought  forward  the  claim  for  Mecklen 
burg,  applied  to  Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander, 
and  received  from  him  a  full  account  of  the  dis 
puted  event,  which  he  said  he  had  copied  from 
papers  left  by  his  father,  John  McKnitt  Alexander. 
Macon  directed  his  inquiry  to  General  Joseph 
Graham,  who  forwarded  the  letter  to  Dr.  Alexan 
der's  brother,  William  B.  Alexander,  with  a  request 
that  he  furnish  Macon  with  all  information  that  his 
father's  papers  could  supply.  William  B.  Alexan 
der  wrote  Macon  on  February  7,  1819,  that  his 
brother  had  furnished  William  Davidson  with  all 
that  could  be  found.  "  Nearly  all  of  my  father's 
papers,"  he  said,  "were  burned  in  the  spring  of 
1800,  which  destroyed  the  papers  now  wanted,  as 
I  believe  he  acted  as  secretary  to  the  committee 
that  declared  independence  for  this  county  in 

1775." 

Macon  endeavored  to  procure  information  to 
verify  statements  in  the  document  received  by 
Davidson,  which  had  been  placed  in  his  hands 
a  month  or  more  before  William  B.  Alexander's 
letter  reached  him,  but  was  unsuccessful.  He 
appears  not  to  have  doubted  its  trustworthiness, 
however,  and  he  sent  it  with  an  old  proclamation 
that  William  B.  Alexander  had  found  among  his 


History  of  the  Controversy  3 

father's  papers  to  the  editor  of  the  Raleigh  Register 
and  North  Carolina  Gazette,  published  in  Raleigh, 
North  Carolina.1  It  appears  in  the  issue  of 
Friday,  April  30,  1819  (Vol.  xx.,  No.  1023),  as 
follows  : 2 

DECLARATION  OF  INDEPENDENCE. 

It  is  not  probably  known  to  many  of  our  readers,  that  the 
citizens  of  Mecklenburg  County,  in  this  State  made  a  Declara 
tion  of  Independence  more  than  a  year  before  Congress  made 
theirs.  The  following  Document  on  the  subject  has  lately 
come  to  the  hands  of  the  Editor  from  unquestionable  author 
ity,  and  is  published  that  it  may  go  down  to  posterity. 


NORTH-CAROLINA,  Mecklenburg  County, 

May  20,  1775 

In  the  spring  of  1775,  the  leading  characters  of  Mecklen 
burg  county,  stimulated  by  that  enthusiastic  patriotism  which 
elevates  the  mind  above  considerations  of  individual  aggran 
disement,  and  scorning  to  shelter  themselves  from  the  impend 
ing  storm  by  submission  to  lawless  power,  &c.  &c.  held  several 
detached  meetings,  in  each  of  which  the  individual  sentiments 
were  "  that  the  cause  of  Boston  was'  the  cause  of  all ;  that 
their  destinies  were  indissolubly  connected  with  those  of 
their  Eastern  fellow-citizens — and  that  they  must  either 
submit  to  all  the  impositions  which  an  unprincipled,  and  to 
them  an  unrepresented  parliament  might  impose — or  support 
their  brethren  who  were  doomed  to  sustain  the  first  shock 

1  Raleigh  Register  editorial,  August  6,  1819  (reprinted  in  Niles  :  Prin 
ciples  and  Acts  of  the  Revolution,  135-136)  ;  and  C.    Tait  to  P.   Jack, 
in  Gov.  Graham's  Address •,    113-114. 

2  From  the   file  in  the  Library  of  Congress.     A  proclamation  of  Gov. 
Martin  of  North  Carolina,  dated  Charlotte-Town,  October  3,  1780,  was 
printed  in  the  same  issue,  "  as  a  curiosity."     A  copy  of  the  original  MS., 
sent  by  Dr.  J.  McKnitt  Alexander  to  Wm.  Davidson,  made  by  Col.  Wm. 
Polk  in  1819,  and  now  in  the  New  York  Public  Library,  will  be  found  in 
the  Appendix. 


4  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

of  that  power,  which,  if  successful  there,  would  ultimately 
overwhelm  all  in  the  common  calamity.  Conformably  to 
these  principles,  Col.  Adam  Alexander,  through  solicitation, 
issued  an  order  to  each  Captain's  Company  in  the  county  of 
Mecklenburg,  (then  comprising  the  present  county  of  Cabar- 
rus)  directing  each  militia  company  to  elect  two  persons,  and 
delegate  to  them  ample  power  to  devise  ways  and  means 
to  aid  and  assist  their  suffering  brethren  in  Boston,  and 
also  generally  to  adopt  measures  to  extricate  themselves  from 
the  impending  storm,  &  to  secure  unimpaired  their  inalienable 
rights,  privileges  and  liberties  from  the  dominant  grasp  of 
British  imposition  and  tyranny. 

In  conforming  to  said  Order,  on  the  ipth  of  May,  1775,  the 
said  delegation  met  in  Charlotte,  vested  with  unlimited 
powers  ;  at  which  time  official  news,  by  express,  arrived  of  the 
Battle  of  Lexington  on  that  day  of  the  preceding  month. 
Every  delegate  felt  the  value  &  importance  of  the  prize,  & 
the  awful  &  solemn  crisis  which  had  arrived — every  bosom 
swelled  with  indignation  at  the  malice,  inveteracy  and  insati 
able  revenge  developed  in  the  late  attack  at  Lexington.  The 
universal  sentiment  was:  let  us  not  flatter  ourselves  that  pop 
ular  harangues — or  resolves  ;  that  popular  vapor  will  avert  the 
storm,  or  vanquish  our  common  enemy — let  us  deliberate — let 
us  calculate  the  issue — the  probable  result ;  and  then  let  us 
act  with  energy  as  brethren  leagued  to  preserve  our  property 
— our  lives, — and  what  is  still  more  endearing,  the  liberties  of 
America.  Abraham  Alexander  was  then  elected  Chairman, 
and  John  M'Knitt  Alexander,  Clerk.  After  a  free  and  full 
discussion  of  the  various  objects  for  which  the  delegation  had 
been  convened,  it  was  unanimously  Ordained — 

1.  Resolved,  That  whosoever  directly  or  indirectly  abetted, 
or  in  any  way,  form  or  manner  countenanced  the  unchartered 
and  dangerous  invasion  of  our  rights,  as  claimed  by  Great- 
Britain,  is  an  enemy  to  this  Country, — to  America, — and  to  the 
inherant  and  inalienable  rights  of  man. 

2.  Resolved,  That  we  the  citizens  of  Mecklenburg  County, 
do  hereby  dissolve  the  political  bands  which  have  connected 
us  to  the  Mother  Country,  and  hereby  absolve  ourselves  from 


History  of  the  Controversy  5 

all  allegiance  to  the  British  Crown,  and  abjure  all  political 
connection,  contract  or  association  with  that  Nation,  who 
have  wantonly  trampled  on  our  rights  and  liberties — and  in 
humanly  shed  the  innocent  blood  of  American  patriots  at 
Lexington. 

3.  Resolved,  That  we  do  hereby  declare  ourselves  a  free  and 
independent  People,  are  and  of  right  ought  to  be,  a  sovereign 
and  self-governing  Association,  under  the  control  of  no  power 
other  than  that  of  our  God  and  the  General  Government  of 
the  Congress  ;  to  the  maintenance  of  which  independence,  we 
solemnly  pledge  to  each  other  our  mutual  cooperation,  our 
lives,  our  fortunes,  and  our  most  sacred  honor. 

4.  Resolved^  That  as  we  now  acknowledge  the  existence  and 
control  of  no  law  or  legal  officer,  civil  or  military,  within  this 
County,  We  do  hereby  ordain  and  adopt,  as  a  rule  of  life,  all, 
each  and  every  of  our  former  laws, — wherein,  nevertheless,  the 
Crown  of  Great-Britain  never  can  be  considered  as  holding 
rights,  privileges,  immunities  or  authority  therein. 

5.  Resolved,  That  it  is  also  further  decreed,  that  all,  each 
and  every  military  officer  in  this  county  is  hereby  reinstated  to 
his  former  command  and  authority,  he  acting  conformably  to 
these  regulations.     And  that  every  member  present  of  this 
delegation  shall  henceforth  be  a  civil  officer,  viz :  a  Justice  of 
the  Peace,  in  the  character  of  a  "Committee  man"  to  issue 
process,  hear  and  determine  all  matters  of  controversy,  accord 
ing  to  said  adopted  laws,  and  to  preserve  peace,  and  union, 
and  harmony  in  said  County, — and  to  use  every  exertion  to 
spread  the   love   of  country  and  fire  of  freedom  throughout 
America,  until  a  more  general  and  organized  government  be 
established  in  this  province. 

A  number  of  bye-laws  were  also  added,  merely  to  protect 
the  association  from  confusion  and  to  regulate  their  general 
conduct  as  citizens.  After  sitting  in  the  Courthouse  all  night, 
neither  sleepy,  hungry,  or  fatigued,  and  after  discussing  every 
paragraph,  they  were  all  passed,  sanctioned  and  declared 
unanimously,  about  2  o'clock,  A.  M.  May  20.  In  a  few  days 
a  deputation  of  said  delegation  convened,  when  Capt.  James 
Jack  of  Charlotte  was  deputed  as  express  to  the  Congress  at 


6  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Philadelphia,  with  a  copy  of  said  Resolves  and  Proceedings, 
together  with  a  letter  addressed  to  our  three  Representatives 
there,  viz :  Richard  Caswell,  Wm.  Hooper  and  Joseph  Hughes 
— under  express  injunction,  personally,  and  through  the  state 
representation,  to  use  all  possible  means  to  have  said  proceed 
ings  sanctioned  and  approved  by  the  General  Congress.  On 
the  return  of  Capt.  Jack,  the  delegation  learned  that  their 
proceedings  were  individually  approved  by  the  members  of 
Congress,  but  that  it  was  deemed  premature  to  lay  them  before 
the  House.  A  joint  letter  from  said  three  members  of  Con 
gress  was  also  received,  complimentary  of  the  zeal  in  the 
common  cause,  and  recommending  perseverance,  order  and 
energy. 

The  subsequent  harmony,  unanimity  and  exertion  in  the 
cause  of  liberty  and  independence,  evidently  resulting  from 
these  regulations,  and  the  continued  exertion  of  said  delega 
tion,  apparently  tranquilised  this  section  of  the  State,  and  met 
with  the  concurrence  and  high  approbation  of  the  Council  of 
Safety,  who  held  their  sessions  at  Newbern  and  Wilmington 
alternately,  and  who  confirmed  the  nomination  and  acts  of 
the  delegation  in  their  official  capacity. 

From  this  delegation  originated  the  Court  of  Enquiry  of  this 
County,  who  constituted  and  held  their  first  session  in  Char 
lotte — they  then  held  their  meetings  regularly  at  Charlotte,  at 
Col.  James  Harris's  and  at  Col.  Phifer's  alternately  one  week 
at  each  place.  It  was  a  civil  Court  founded  on  military 
process.  Before  this  judicature  all  suspicious  persons  were 
made  to  appear,  who  were  formally  tried  and  banished, 
or  continued  under  guard.  Its  jurisdiction  was  as  un 
limited  as  toryism,  and  its  decrees  as  final  as  the  con 
fidence  and  patriotism  of  the  County.  Several  were  arrested 
and  brought  before  them  from  Lincoln,  Rowan  and  the  adjacent 
counties — 

[The  foregoing  is  a  true  copy  of  the  papers  on  the  above 
subject,  left  in  my  hands  by  John  M'Knitt  Alexander,  dec'd  ; 
I  find  it  mentioned  on  file  that  the  original  book  was  burned 
April,  1800.  That  a  copy  of  the  proceedings  was  sent  to 
Hugh  Williamson  in  New  York,  then  writing  a  History  of 


History  of  the  Controversy  7 

North-Carolina,   and   that  a  copy  was  sent  to  Gen.  W.  R. 
Davie.  J.  M'KNITT.] ' 

This  article  was  extensively  copied  by  the  news 
papers  of  the  country,2  and  came  to  the  notice  of 
the  venerable  John  Adams  in  the  Essex  Register 
of  June  5,  1819,  published  in  Salem,  Massachusetts. 
Adams  sent  a  copy  of  the  newspaper  to  Thomas 
Jefferson  as  containing  "  one  of  the  greatest  curi- 
ositys  and  one  of  the  deepest  Mysterys  "  that  ever 
occurred  to  him.3  He  wrote  thus  of  it : 

How  is  it  possible  that  this  paper  should  have  been  con 
cealed  from  me  to  this  day  ?  had  it  been  communicated  to 
me  in  the  time  of  it,  I  know,  if  you  do  not  know,  that  it  would 
have  been  printed  in  every  Whig  newspaper  upon  this  Con 
tinent,  you  know  if  I  had  possessed  it,  I  would  have  made 
the  Hall  of  Congress  Echo  and  re-echo  with  it  fifteen  mongths 
before  your  Declaration  of  Independence. — What  a  poor, 
ignorant,  malicious,  short-sighted,  Crapulous  Mass  is  Tom 
Pain's  Common  Sense,  in  comparison  with  this  paper,  had 
I  known  it,  I  would  have  commented  upon  it  from  the  day  you 
entered  Congress  till  the  fourth  of  July,  1776. — The  genuine 
sense  of  America  at  that  moment  was  never  so  well  expressed 
before,  nor  since. 

Adams  evidently  dictated  this  letter  cur  rente 
calamo.  A  little  reflection  would  have  told  him  that 
the  " genuine  sense  of  America  at  that  moment" 

1  Dr.   Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander  usually  omitted  his  surname  in  his 
signature  because  of  the  commonness  of  the  name  Alexander  in  Mecklen 
burg,   and  was  frequently  spoken  of  and  addressed  as  "J.   McKnitt." — 
Gov.  Graham's  Address,  29-30.    The  writer  has  seen  several  of  his  private 
letters,  all  bearing  this  signature. 

2  Raleigh  Register,  August  6,  1819. 

3  June  22,  1819.    From  the  original  letter,  written  by  an  amanuensis  and 
signed  by  Adams,  in  the  Jefferson  MSS.  in  the  Library  of  Congress.     It  is 
printed  in  the  Works  of  Adams,  x.,  380-381. 


8  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

was  opposed  to  independence.  Even  he  and  Jeffer 
son  still  desired  reconciliation  with  Great  Britain 
in  May,  1775,  and  few  men  then  dared  to  openly 
advocate  independence.  Mindful  of  their  former 
bitter  political  rivalry,  which  had  given  way,  in  the 
evening  of  life,  to  the  friendship  of  earlier  days, 
he  probably  wrote  with  some  satisfaction  in 
the  thought  that  his  successful  rival  would  wince 
under  his  lavish  praises  of  the  new-found  de 
claration  of  independence  and  the  implied  charge 
of  plagiarism  which  they  conveyed ;  for  Adams 
was  convinced  that  either  the  Mecklenburg  De 
claration  or  Jefferson's  Declaration  borrowed  one 
from  the  other.  Before  he  received  Jefferson's 
reply,  Adams  wrote  one  of  his  correspondents  : l 

I  was  struck  with  so  much  astonishment  on  reading  this 
document  that  I  could  not  help  inclosing  it  immediately  to 
Mr.  Jefferson,  who  must  have  seen  it,  in  the  time  of  it,  for  he 
has  copied  the  spirit,  the  sense,  and  the  expressions  of  it 
verbatim  into  his  Declaration  of  the  4th  of  July,  1776.  .  .  . 
That  paper  must  be  more  universally  made  known  to  the 
present  and  future  generation. 

Unlike  Adams,  Jefferson  was  not  ready  to  accept 
the  paper  of  Mecklenburg.  He  was  doubtless  as 
much  annoyed  as  Adams  anticipated.  "  And  you 
seem  to  think  it  genuine,"  he  wrote  Adams.2  "  I 
believe  it  spurious.  I  deem  it  to  be  a  very  unjus 
tifiable  quiz,  like  that  of  the  volcano,  so  minutely 
related  to  us  as  having  broken  out  in  North  Carolina, 

1  Adams  to  William  Bentley,  July,  15,  1819,  Works,  x.,  381. 

2  Jefferson  to  Adams,  July  9,  1819,  Writings   (Ford   ed.),  x.,  136-139. 
This  letter  forms  a  part  of  the  "State  Pamphlet",  reprinted  in  the  Appendix. 


History  of  the  Controversy  9 

some  half  a  dozen  years  ago,  .  .  ."  It  is  not 
remarkable  that  his  inability  to  find  any  notice 
of  the  publication  of  the  resolutions  by  the  Raleigh 
Register,  after  a  lapse  of  two  months,  in  Thomas 
Ritchie's  newspaper  at  Richmond  and  in  the  Na 
tional  Intelligencer  of  Washington,  the  leading 
journal  of  the  country  and  edited  by  a  son  of  the 
editor  of  the  Raleigh  Register,  should  have  led 
Jefferson  to  express  his  doubt  whether  they  were 
really  copied  from  that  paper  by  the  Essex  Register^ 
and  to  deem  them  to  be  one  of  the  hoaxes  frequently 
published  in  the  newspapers  of  the  day — the  work, 
perhaps,  of  the  "  Essex  Junto"  class  of  statesmen, 
ever  ready  to  traduce  his  reputation.  But  the 
tone  of  Adams's  letter  seems  to  have  so  disturbed 
his  equanimity  that  in  attempting  to  point  out  the 
marks  of  spuriousness  he  mistook  the  name  of 
Richard  Caswell,  who  had  been  dead  many  years, 
for  that  of  William  R.  Davie,  then  living,  as  the 
person  mentioned  in  the  certificate  accompanying 
the  resolutions  to  whom  John  McKnitt  Alexander 
had  given  a  copy  of  them ;  and,  confounding  the 
"  delegation "  of  Mecklenburg  county,  to  whose 
continued  "exertion  in  the  cause  of  liberty  and 
independence  "  the  paper  referred,  with  the  North 
Carolina  delegates  in  the  Continental  Congress, 
who  were  said  to  have  approved  the  resolutions, 
he  rashly  said  that  "  we  had  not  a  greater  tory 
in  Congress  than  Hooper ;  that  Hughes  was 
very  wavering,  sometimes  firm,  sometimes  feeble, 
according  as  the  day  was  clear  or  cloudy ;  that 
Caswell,  indeed,  was  a  good  whig,  and  kept  these 


io          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

gentlemen  to  the  notch,  while  he  was  present ;  but 
that  he  left  us  soon,  and  their  line  of  conduct  be 
came  uncertain  until  Penn  came,  who  fixed  Hughes 
and  the  vote  of  the  State."  In  saying  that  there 
was  "  not  a  greater  tory  "  in  the  Continental  Con 
gress  than  William  Hooper,  Jefferson  clearly  did 
not  mean  that  he  was  a  loyalist :  he  rightly  placed 
Hooper  and  Hewes,  both  North  Carolina  signers 
of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  among  the 
number  of  those  sturdy  patriots  who  hesitated  to 
the  last  to  break  off  all  political  connection  with  the 
mother  country,  and  who  had  a  majority  in  the 
Continental  Congress  until  June,  I776.1  "I  must 
not  be  understood,"  said  Jefferson,  "as  sugges 
ting  any  doubtfulness  in  the  State  of  North  Caro 
lina.  No  State  was  more  fixed  or  forward.  Nor 
do  I  affirm,  positively,  that  this  paper  is  a  fabri 
cation  ;  because  the  proof  of  a  negative  can  only 
be  presumptive.  But  I  shall  believe  it  such  until 
positive  and  solemn  proof  of  its  authenticity  shall 
be  produced."  Jefferson  based  his  opinion 
on  the  utter  lack  of  contemporary  evidence 
of  "  this  flaming  declaration,"  although  sent 
to  the  Continental  Congress,  and  the  silence 
of  historians. 

Jefferson  showed  unworthy  pique  in  defending 
the  originality  of  his  immortal  document  as  far  as 
the  "  apocryphal "  paper  of  Mecklenburg  was  con 
cerned  ;  but  his  letter  contained  facts  and  argu- 

1  Post,  pp.  69-72.  Cf.  W.  E.  Dodd,  Life  of  Nathaniel  Macon,  19-20. 
According  to  John  Adams,  the  majority  long  depended  upon  the  vote  of 
Joseph  Hewes,  Works,  x.,  35,  381. 


History  of  the  Controversy  n 

ments  which  have  never  been  shaken  by  testimony 
since  discovered. 

It  has  entirely  convinced  me  [wrote  Adams  in  reply]  *  that 
the  Mecklengburg  Resolutions  are  a  fiction,  when  I  first  read 
them  in  the  Essex  Register,  I  was  struck  with  astonishment. 
It  appeared  to  me  utterly  incredible  that  they  should  be 
genuine  ;  but  there  were  so  many  circumstances  calculated 
to  impose  on  the  public  that  I  thought  it  my  duty  to  take 
measures  for  the  detection  of  the  imposture,  for  this  purpose 
I  instantly  inclosed  the  Essex  Register  to  you,  knowing  that 
if  you  had  either  seen  or  heard  of  these  resolutions,  you  would 
have  informed  me  of  it.  as  they  are  unknown  to  you,  they 
must  have  been  unknown  to  all  mankind. — I  have  sent  a  Copy 
of  your  letter  to  Salem,  not  to  be  printed,  but  to  be  used  as 
decisive  authority  for  the  Editor  to  correct  his  error  in  the 
Essex  Register. 

Adams  asks  who  the  "  Demon  "  could  have  been 
to  invent  the  hoax,  perhaps  with  intent  to  bring  a 
charge  of  plagiarism  against  Jefferson,  or  for  the 
"  mere  vanity  of  producing  a  jeu  d'esprit,  to  set  the 
world  agasp  and  afford  a  topic  of  conversation  in 
this  piping  time  of  Peace."  He,  too,  appears  to 
have  doubted  after  hearing  from  Jefferson  whether 
it  was  copied  from  the  Raleigh  newspaper,  for  he 
wrote  Jefferson  a  week  later3  and  sent  a  copy  of 
the  National  Register,  "to  convince  you  that  the 
Essex  Register  is  not  to  blame  for  printing  the 
Mecklingburg  County  Resolutions." 

On  July  24,  1819,  three  days  after  Adams  wrote 
Jefferson  that  he  had  sent  a  copy  of  his  letter 
to  Salem,  the  Essex  Register  announced  that  the 

1  Adams  to  Jefferson,  July  21,  1819,  Jefferson  MSS.,  Library  of 
Congress. 

*  Adams  to  Jefferson,  July  28,  1819,  Jefferson  MSS. 


12  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Mecklenburg  resolutions  copied  from  the  Raleigh 
Register  had  not  had  universal  credit,  and  that  al 
though  the  publisher  said  that  they  rested  on  high 
authority,  the  public  would  be  pleased  to  know  more 
about  them.1  In  reply,  the  editor  of  the  Raleigh 
Register  published  on  August  6,  1 8 1 9,  a  statement  of 
the  causes  that  had  led  to  the  exhuming  and  pub 
lication  of  the  resolutions.  "  The  plot  thickens," 
wrote  Adams  to  a  friend  on  seeing  this  explana 
tory  statement.3  "  The  name  of  the  Cato  of  North 
Carolina,  the  honest,  hoary-headed,  stern,  determined 
republican,  Macon,  strikes  me  with  great  force." 
But  "  an  accumulation  of  miracles,"  some  of  which 
will  be  noticed  later,  opposed  an  insuperable  barrier 
to  a  belief  by  Adams  in  the  authenticity  of  the  Meck 
lenburg  resolutions.  "  Haud  credo",  he  said.  "  I 
cannot  believe  that  they  were  known  to  one  member 
of  Congress  on  the  fourth  of  July,  1776.  .  .  .  The 
Declaration  of  Independence  made  by  Congress  on 
the  fourth  of  July,  1 776,  is  a  document,  an  instrument, 
a  record  that  ought  not  to  be  disgraced  or  trifled  with. 
.  .  .  That  this  fiction  is  ancient  and  not  modern 
seems  to  be  ascertained.  It  is  of  so  much  more  im 
portance  that  it  should  be  thoroughly  investigated." 
The  opinions  of  these  two  last  surving  members 
of  the  Continental  Congress  of  1775  were  not  made 
public  at  this  time,  and  the  editor  of  the  Raleigh 

1  Raleigh  Register,  August  6,  1819.  The  article  in  the  Essex  Register 
contained  the  substance  of  Adams's  letter  of  July  21,  1819,  to  Jefferson,  but 
without  mention  of  their  names. 

8  Adams  to  William  Bentley,  August  21,  1819,  Works,  383-384. 
Bentley  had  sent  Adams  a  copy  of  the  National  Intelligencer  of  August 
12,  1819,  which  contained  the  reply  of  the  Raleigh  Register. 


History  of  the  Controversy  13 

Register  considered  his  statement  relative  to  the 
source  whence  the  Mecklenburg  resolutions  were 
procured  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  incredulity  ex 
pressed  in  the  newspapers  of  the  country.  "  We 
trust,  therefore,"  he  said,1  "  that  the  most  sceptical 
will  no  longer  entertain  a  doubt  of  the  authenticity 
of  this  declaration  of  independence  of  Mecklenburg 
county.  If  further  evidence  of  these  facts  were 
wanting,  it  is  believed  the  testimony  of  one  of  the 
most  respectable  inhabitants  of  this  city,  who  was 
present  when  the  declaration  was  resolved  upon, 
might  be  added."  Colonel  William  Polk,  the  wit 
ness  referred  to,  procured  and  published  the  state 
ments  of  several  men  of  unimpeachable  integrity, 
who  testified  that  they  were  also  present  on  the 
occasion ;  and  Nathaniel  Macon,  who  had  first 
brought  the  matter  to  the  attention  of  the  general 
public,  collected  further  testimony,  including  that  of 
Captain  James  Jack,  who  said  that  he  carried  to  the 
Continental  Congress  a  declaration  of  independ 
ence  adopted  in  Mecklenburg  county  in  May,  1775.' 
All  of  these  aged  men  stated  that  they  had  been 
present  at  Charlotte,  the  county  seat  of  Mecklen 
burg,  and  heard  a  declaration  of  independence  read 
before  a  large  concourse  of  people  ;  and  while  some 
of  them  could  not  be  precise  as  to  the  date,  and 
some  recollected  that  Colonel  Thomas  Polk,  not 
Colonel  Adam  Alexander,  issued  the  order  for  the 
meeting  that  adopted  the  declaration,  and  that 

1  Raleigh  Register,  August  6,  1819. 

8  Ibid.,  August  13,  1819,  February  II  and  18,  1820,  and  May  26,  1820. 
This  testimony  was  reprinted  in  a  pamphlet  in  1822  by  Col.  William  Polk. 


14          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Ephraim  Brevard,  not  John  McKnitt  Alexander, 
acted  as  secretary,  they  substantiated  the  main  facts 
set  forth  in  the  historical  note  accompanying  the 
resolutions  in  the  Raleigh  Register  of  April  30,  1819. 
There  was  no  question  in  North  Carolina  about  the 
genuineness  of  the  resolutions.  Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt 
Alexander  certified  them  to  be  a  true  copy  of  pa 
pers  left  by  his  father,  in  whose  house  the  original 
records  had  been  destroyed  by  fire  in  1800,  and 
stated  that  he  found  it  "  mentioned  on  file  "  that 
a  copy  had  been  sent  to  General  William  R.  Davie. 
Shortly  after  General  Davie's  death,  in  1820,  there 
was  found  among  his  papers  a  mutilated  manuscript 
in  the  handwriting  of  John  McKnitt  Alexander 
which  contained  a  part  of  the  narrative  and  reso 
lutions  published  in  1819. 

This  overwhelming  array  of  testimony  satisfied 
North  Carolinians  and  apparently  silenced  the  in 
credulous  elsewhere.  A  knowledge  of  the  event — 
it  was  known  in  1819  to  but  few  of  the  readers 
of  the  leading  newspaper  of  the  state — spread 
throughout  North  Carolina  and  Tennessee,  and  the 
bold  step  of  the  patriots  of  Mecklenburg  gradually 
became  a  fixed  topic  for  eulogy  at  4th  of  July 
celebrations.1  Its  anniversary  was  first  celebrated 
at  Charlotte  on  May  20,  1825,  and  a  large  number 
of  Revolutionary  worthies  attended.2 

Thus  the  matter  remained  until  Jefferson's  letter 
to  Adams,  discrediting  the  authenticity  of  the  docu 
ment,  was  published  in  1829  in  the  first  edition  of 


1  Raleigh  Register  files. 

2 /&</.,  March  15,  and  June  7,  1825. 


History  of  the  Controversy  15 

his  Works.  The  effect  was  not  what  it  might  have 
been  had  it  appeared  before  the  Mecklenburg  De 
claration  was  so  deeply  rooted  in  the  minds  and 
hearts  of  the  people  of  all  North  Carolina.  Its 
ill-tempered  scepticism  and  unfortunate  manner  of 
referring  to  the  North  Carolina  signers  of  the  De 
claration  of  Independence,  particularly  the  term 
"tory"  applied  to  Hooper,  lost  it  much  of  its  force. 
In  some  quarters  it  was  construed  to  be  an  aggres 
sive  and  "  insulting  attack  "  upon  the  proudest  page 
of  the  Revolutionary  history  of  North  Carolina 
and  upon  the  patriotism  of  her  most  honored  dead.1 
But  publications  made  their  appearance  for  the  first 
time  in  North  Carolina,  it  seems,  u  calling  in  question 
the  authenticity  of  the  document  as  being  neither 
a  true  paper,  nor  a  paper  of  a  true  convention."2 

To  give  to  the  world  the  "  positive  and  solemn 
proof"  that  Jefferson  demanded,  the  legislature  of 
North  Carolina,  at  its  session  in  1830-31,  appointed 
a  committee  "  to  examine,  collate,  and  arrange  "  all 
documentary  evidence  that  could  be  obtained.  The 
committee  affirmed  the  genuineness  and  authen 
ticity  of  the  Mecklenburg  resolutions.  Its  report 
and  accompanying  documents,  comprising  the  evi 
dence  previously  published  and  additional  testi 
mony,  was  published  in  pamphlet  form  in  1831  by 
Governor  Montfort  Stokes,  under  the  authority  and 
direction  of  the  General  Assembly.3 

1  Joseph  Seawell  Jones  :  A  Defence  of  the  Revolutionary  History  of  North 
Carolina  from  the  Aspersions  of  Mr.  Jefferson.  1834.  Cf.  Randall's 
Life  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  iii,  573. 

*  W.  H.  Foote  :   Sketches  of  North  Carolina,  207. 

8  This  pamphlet,  with  the  omission  of  the  four  last  pages,  which  relate 


16          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Shortly  after  the  appearance  of  the  "  State  Pam 
phlet,"  as  it  is  commonly  called,  Peter  Force, 
of  Washington,  in  compiling  materials  for  his 
American  Archives,  discovered  in  an  old  English 
periodical,  Almoris  Remembrancer,  a  proclamation 
issued  by  the  royal  governor,  Josiah  Martin  of 
North  Carolina,  on  August  8,  1775,  in  which  the 
Governor  said  that  he  had  "  seen  a  most  infamous 
publication  in  the  Cape  Fear  Mercury  importing  to 
be  resolves  of  a  set  of  people  styling  themselves  a 
committee  for  the  county  of  Mecklenburg,  most 
traitorously  declaring  the  entire  dissolution  of  the 
laws,  government,  and  constitution  of  this  country, 
and  setting  up  a  system  of  rule  and  regulation  re 
pugnant  to  the  laws  and  subversive  of  his  majesty's 
government,"  etc.  The  publication  of  the  fore 
going  extract  from  the  Governor's  proclamation 
was  followed  in  a  very  few  months  (in  1833),  by 

to  the  "Cumberland  Association,"  is  reprinted  in  the  Appendix.  The 
preface,  written  by  David  L.  Swain  at  the  instance  of  Governor  Montfort 
Stokes,  states  that  Jefferson's  letter  of  July  9,  1819,  "was  at  that  time 
published  in  various  newspapers,  and  has  been  since  given  to  the  world  in 
the  4th  volume  of  Mr.  Jefferson's  Works,  page  314".  The  State  Pamphlet 
was  published  in  July,  1831,  the  first  edition  of  Jefferson's  Works  in  1829, 
and  the  second  in  1830.  Swain  was  a  boy  of  eighteen  in  1819,  and  probably 
thought  that  Jefferson's  letter  was  published  in  that  year  or  thereabouts 
because  he  knew  that  it  had  appeared  in  the  newspapers  before  1830  and 
was  ignorant  of  the  earlier  edition  of  Jefferson's  Works.  No  notice  of  it 
has  been  found  in  the  complete  file  of  the  Raleigh  Register  1819-1829,  in 
the  Library  of  Congress,  in  broken  files  of  other  North  Carolina  newspapers, 
in  the  certificates  of  the  aged  witnesses  who  gave  their  testimony  during 
these  years,  nor  in  the  mass  of  contemporaneous  private  letters  on  the  Meck 
lenburg  Declaration  which  the  writer  has  had  access  to.  The  carefully 
prepared  sketches  of  the  life  of  William  Hooper  that  were  published  in  the 
Hillsboro  Recorder  in  the  fall  of  1822  would  certainly  have  alluded  to 
Jefferson's  characterization  of  Hooper  as  a  "  tory,  "  which  aroused  ereat 


History  of  the  Controversy  17 

the  discovery  of  the  original  proclamation  book  of 
Governors  Tryon  and  Martin  in  the  town  of  New 
Bern  by  the  Rev.  Francis  L.  Hawks.1  Here  seemed 
to  be  written  contemporaneous  evidence  of  the 
authenticity  of  the  Mecklenburg  resolutions.  But 
many  believed  that  the  remarkable  coincidence 
between  phrases  in  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration 
and  the  Declaration  of  July  4,  1776,  could  not  have 
been  the  result  of  accident,  and  that  although  a 
paper  might  have  been  drawn  up  in  Mecklenburg 
on  the  2Oth  of  May,  1775,  it  was  not  in  the  words 
of  the  instrument  as  it  then  stood.  Professor 
George  Tucker  took  this  view  of  the  matter  in 
his  Life  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  published  in  1837. 
In  a  criticism  of  this  work  in  the  New  York  Re 
view  of  March,  1837,  Dr.  Hawks  roughly  handled 
the  character  of  Jefferson  and  charged  him  with 
plagiarism. 

At  this  stage  of  the  controversy,  when  all  the 
aged  witnesses  to  the  famous  meeting  in  Charlotte 

feeling  in  1830,  had  the  Essex  Register  printed  Jefferson's  letter  against 
the  wish  of  John  Adams.  The  North  Carolina  Journal  said  in  1830  : 
"The  publication  of  Mr.  Jefferson's  letter  of  the  gth  July,  1819,  to  Mr. 
Adams,  has  caused  no  little  surprise."  The  article  proceeds  to  defend 
Hooper.  The  Raleigh  Register  of  September  20,  1830,  copied  this  article 
"for  the  purpose",  the  editor  said,  "of  rendering  justice  to  a  Patriot 
whose  reputation  had  been  assailed,  as  well  as  to  substantiate  the  claim  of 
North  Carolina  to  the  honor  of  having  been  the  first  to  *  pledge  the  lives, 
the  fortunes,  and  the  sacred  honor,'  of  her  citizens,  in  the  perilous  struggle 
for  emancipation.  When  we  first  cast  our  eyes  over  Mr.  Jefferson's  letter 
in  relation  to  this  subject,  we  were  struck  with  the  contemptuous  manner 
in  which  Mr.  Hooper's  name  was  mentioned,  and  intended  investigating 
the  truth  of  the  insinuations,"  etc.  The  article  was  reprinted  in  the  State 
Pamphlet,  pp.  30-32,  from  the  Raleigh  Register. 

*  D.  L.  Swain  in  N.  C.  Univ.  Mag.,  May,  1853,  and  in  Cooke's  Revolu 
tionary  History  of  N.  C. ,  104. 
2 


1 8          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

had  passed  away,  the  matter  was  given  an  entirely 
new  phase  by  Peter  Force's  discovery  of  the  pre 
amble  and  first  four  resolutions  of  a  series  dated 
Charlotte  Town,  Mecklenburg  county,  May  31, 
1775,  in  the  Massachusetts  Spy  or  American  Oracle 
of  Liberty  of  July  12,  1775.  Mr.  Force  published 
these  resolutions  in  the  Daily  National  Intelligencer 
of  December  18,  1838,  with  the  following  intro 
ductory  remarks 1 : 

The  Resolutions  of  Mecklenburg  county,  North  Carolina,  of 
May  20,  1775,  .  .  .  have  excited  more  attention  the  last 
eight  years  than  any  other  occurrence  of  the  Revolution. — The 
authenticity  of  these  resolutions  has  been  questioned,  yet 
no  others  have  been  produced  ;  and  it  could  not  be  denied 
that  they,  or  others  of  a  like  character,  were  passed,  .  .  . 
In  the  course  of  my  examinations  into  the  popular  proceed 
ings  of  that  period  of  our  history,  I  have  met  with  another  set 
of  resolutions  adopted  by  Mecklenburg  county  in  May,  1775, 
which  answer  very  well  to  the  description  given  by  Governor 
Martin.  They  are  expressed  in  somewhat  different  terms,  and 
are  besides  of  a  much  wider  scope  than  those  heretofore 
published;  being  in  fact  a  general  Declaration  of  Independence 
of  all  the  Colonies. 

Soon  afterwards  Mr.  Force  found  the  resolutions 
printed  in  more  complete,  yet  abbreviated  form  in 
\\\eNew  York  Journal;  or,  The  General  Advertiser 
of  June  29,  1 775.2  After  repeated  searches  made  at 
the  instance  of  David  L.  Swain,  president  of  the 
University  of  North  Carolina,  the  entire  series  of 
May  3i>  *775>  was  brought  to  light  in  1847  by  Dr. 
Joseph  Johnson,  of  South  Carolina.  They  were 

1  From  the  file  in  the  New  York  Public  Library. 

8  William  Q.  Force  in  the  National  Republican  (Washington,  D.  C.) 
November  24,  1873. 


History  of  the  Controversy  19 

found  in  a  copy  of  the  South  Carolina  Gazette;  And 
Country  Journal  vi  June  13,  1775,  preserved  in  the 
Charleston  Library.  George  Bancroft  found  another 
copy  of  the  same  paper  in  London  a  few  days 
later.1 

The  newly-discovered  resolutions,  even  in  the 
condensed  form  in  which  they  were  first  found, 
were  inaccurately  described  by  Mr.  Force,  for  they 
do  not  declare  absolute  independence  of  Great 
Britain.  Some  persons  regarded  them  as  a  declara 
tion  of  independence,  however,  and  thought  the 
difference  of  eleven  days  in  the  rival  declarations 
not  worth  disputing.  Those  who  had  doubted 
the  genuineness  of  the  May  2Oth  resolutions  and 
many  others  outside  of  North  Carolina,  concluded 
with  Mr.  Force  that  the  paper  of  the  3ist  was 
the  "  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Independence  " 
which  the  aged  men  who  gave  their  testimony 
between  1819  and  1830  had  in  mind.  Their  posi 
tion  was  fortified  by  a  certificate,  dated  September 
3,  1800,  appended  by  John  McKnitt  Alexander  to 
the  copy  of  the  May  2oth  resolutions  that  he  gave 
to  Gen.  W.  R.  Davie,  from  which  it  was  learned 
that  those  resolutions  were  written  from  memory, 
after  the  destruction  of  the  records  in  Alexander's 
house  in  April,  1800.  Although  this  copy  was 
found  soon  after  General  Davie's  death  in  1820, 
the  certificate  remained  unknown  to  the  general 
public  until  the  Rev.  Charles  Phillips  borrowed  the 

1  Copy  of  a  letter  of  D.  L.  Swain  to  B.  J.  Lossing,  December  20,  1851, 
in  the  Bancroft  MSS. ,  N.  Y.  Pub.  Lib.  Cf.  Historical  Mag.,  December, 
1867. 


20          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

original  Davie  paper  from  Governor  Swain  and 
published  the  certificate  in  the  North  Carolina 
University  Magazine  of  May,  1853.  But  the  claims 
of  Mecklenburg  were  upheld  by  many  able  writers, 
including  such  excellent  historians  as  Irving,  Hil- 
dreth,  and  Charles  Francis  Adams.  For  a  number 
of  years,  however,  the  certificate  to  the  Davie 
paper  was  ignored  in  North  Carolina. 

It  was  contended  that  Alexander  said  more  than 
once  that  the  Davie  copy  was  substantially  correct, 
and  that  the  aged  witnesses,  without  an  exception, 
believed  it  to  be  correct,  or  stated  positively  that 
the  paper  they  remembered  was  a  declaration 
of  independence.  Dr.  Francis  L.  Hawks  testified 
from  his  personal  communications  with  Fran9ois- 
Xavier  Martin  that  the  resolutions  of  May  2Oth 
which  appear  in  Martin's  History  of  North  Carolina, 
published  in  1829,  and  which  agree  substantially 
with  those  in  the  Davie  copy,  were  obtained  by 
Martin  before  1800,  the  year  in  which  the  Davie 
copy  was  written.1  It  is  claimed  that  Martin 
copied  them  from  the  Cape  Fear  Mercury,  to 
which  newspaper  the  royal  governor  referred 
in  his  proclamation  and  dispatches  to  England. 

The  advocates  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration 
now  argue  that  the  so-called  May  3ist  Resolves 
were  never  adopted  in  the  form  in  which  they  were 
published  in  the  contemporaneous  Charleston  news- 

1  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  of  Independence \  a  lecture  by  Rev.  Francis 
L.  Hawks,  D.D.  LL.  D. ,  delivered  before  the  New  York  Historical  Society, 
December  16,  1852,  in  Cooke's  Revolutionary  History  of  N.  C.,  62.  (Cited 
hereafter  as  Dr.  Hawks1  s  Lecture,  Cooke.) 


History  of  the  Controversy  21 

paper,  but  amended  on  the  2Oth  of   May  into  a 
declaration  of  independence.1 

1  This  hypothesis  was  first  advanced,  we  believe,  by  Dr.  George  W. 
Graham,  in  an  address  published  in  1895  under  the  title  of  Why  North 
Carolinians  Believe  in  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Independence^  and 
was  elaborated  by  him  in  his  latest  work,  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of 
Independence,  May  20,  *77Si  and  the  lives,  of  its  signer s^  (1905). 


CHAPTER   II 

THE  TRUE  "DECLARATION" 

THE  Mecklenburg  resolves  of  May  31,  1775, 
appeared  in  the  South- Carolina  Gazette;  And 
Country  Journal  of  Tuesday,  June  13,  1775, 
published  in  "  Charles-Town,"  South  Carolina,  as 
follows 1 : 

Charlotte-Town,  Mecklenburg  County,  May  31,  1775. 

This  day  the  Committee  of  this  county  met,  and  passed  the 
following  Resolves  : 

WHEREAS  by  an  Address  presented  to  his  Majesty  by 
both  Houses  of  Parliament,  in  February  last,  the  American 
colonies  are  declared  to  be  in  a  state  of  actual  rebellion, 
we  conceive,  that  all  laws  and  commissions  confirmed  by,  or 
derived  from  the  authority  of  the  King  or  Parliament,  are  an 
nulled  and  vacated,  and  the  former  civil  constitution  of  these 
colonies,  for  the  present,  wholly  suspended.  To  provide,  in 
some  degree,  for  the  exigencies  of  this  county,  in  the  present 
alarming  period,  we  deem  it  proper  and  necessary  to  pass 
the  following  Resolves,  viz. 

I.     That   all  commissions,  civil   and   military,    heretofore 

1  From  a  photographic  facsimile  of  the  original  newspaper  in  the 
Charleston  Library.  One  of  these  facsimiles  is  in  the  Emmet  Collection, 
New  York  Public  Library.  The  imprint  of  the  newspaper  is,  "  Charies- 
Town  :  Printed  by  Charles  Crouch,  on  the  Bay,  the  Corner  of  Elliott- 
Street."  No.  498. 

22 


The  True  " Declaration'*  23 

granted  by  the  Crown,  to  be  exercised  in  these  colonies,  are 
null  and  void,  and  the  constitution  of  each  particular  colony 
wholly  suspended. 

II.  That  the  Provincial  Congress  of  each  province,  under 
the  direction  of  the  great  Continental  Congress,  is  invested 
with  all  legislative  and  executive  powers  within  their  respec 
tive  provinces  ;  and  that  no   other  legislative   or  executive 
power,  does,  or  can  exist,  at  this  time,  in  any  of  these  colonies. 

III.  As  all  former  laws  are  now  suspended  in  this  province, 
and  the  Congress  have  not  yet  provided  others,  we  judge  it 
necessary,  for  better  preservation  of  good  order,  to  form  cer 
tain  rules  and  regulations  for  the  internal  government  of  this 
county,  until  laws  shall  be  provided  for  us  by  the  Congress. 

IV.  That  the  inhabitants  of  this  county  do  meet  on  a  cer 
tain  day  appointed  by  this  Committee,   and  having   formed 
themselves  into  nine  companies,  (to  wit)  eight  in  the  county, 
and  one   in  the  town  of  Charlotte,  do  chusea  Colonel  and 
other  military   officers,   who  shall    hold   and  exercise  their 
several  powers   by  virtue  of   this   choice,   and   independent 
of  the  Crown  of   Great-Britain,  and   former  constitution  of 
this  province. 

V.  That  for  the  better  preservation  of  the  peace  and  ad 
ministration  of  justice,  each  of  those  companies  do  chuse  from 
their  own   body,  two  discreet   freeholders,  who  shall  be  em 
powered,  each  by  himself  and  singly,  to  decide  and  determine 
all  matters  of  controversy,  arising  within  said  company,  under 
the  sum  of  twenty  shillings  ;    and  jointly  and    together,  all 
controversies  under  the  sum  of  forty  shillings  ;  yet  so  as  that 
their  decisions  may  admit  of  appeal  to  the  Convention  of  the 
Select-Men  of  the  county  ;  and  also  that  any  one  of  these  men, 
shall  have  power  to  examine  and  commit  to  confinement  per 
sons  accused  of  pettit  larceny. 

VI.  That   those  two  Select-Men,  thus  chosen,  do  jointly 
and  together  chuse  from  the  body  of  their  particular  company, 
two  persons  properly  qualified  to  act  as  Constables,  who  may 
assist  them  in  the  execution  of  their  office. 

VII.  That  upon  the  complaint  of  any  persons  to  either  of 
these  Select-Men,  he  do  issue  his   warrant,  directed  to  the 


24          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Constable,  commanding  him  to  bring  the  aggressor  before  him 
or  them,  to  answer  said  complaint. 

VIII.  That  these  eighteen  Select-Men,  thus  appointed,  do 
meet  every  third  Thursday  in  January,  April,  July,  and  Octo 
ber,  at  the  Court-House,  in  Charlotte,  to  hear  and  determine 
all  matters  of  controversy,  for  sums  exceeding  forty  shillings, 
also  appeals  ;  and  in  cases  of  felony,  to  commit  the  person  or 
persons  convicted  thereof  to  close  confinement,  until  the  Pro 
vincial  Congress  shall  provide  and  establish  laws  and  modes 
of  proceeding  in  all  such  cases. 

IX.  That   these  eighteen  Select-Men,  thus  convened,  do 
chuse  a  Clerk,  to  record  the  transactions  of  said   Convention, 
and  that  said  clerk,  upon  the  application  of  any  person  or  per 
sons  aggrieved,  do  issue  his  warrant  to  one  of  the  Constables 
of  the  company  to  which  the  offender  belongs,  directing  said 
Constable  to  summons  and  warn  said  offender  to  appear  before 
the  Convention,  at  their  next  sitting,  to  answer  the  aforesaid 
complaint. 

X.  That  any  person  making  complaint  upon  oath,  to   the 
Clerk,  or  any  member  of  the  Convention,  that  he  has  reason  to 
suspect,  that  any  person  or  persons  indebted  to  him,  in  a  sum 
above  forty  shillings,  intend  clandestinely  to  withdraw  from  the 
county,  without  paying  such  debt,  the  Clerk  or  such  member 
shall  issue  his  warrant  to  the  Constable,  commanding  him  to 
take  said  person  or  persons  into  safe  custody,  until  the  next 
sitting  of  the  Convention. 

XI.  That  when  a  debtor  for  a  sum  below   forty  shillings 
shall  abscond    and  leave   the  county,  the  warrant  granted  as 
aforesaid,  shall  extend  to  any  goods  or  chattels  of  said  debtor, 
as  may  be  found,  and  such  goods  or  chattels  be  seized  and  held 
in  custody  by  the  Constable,  for  the  space  of  thirty  days  ;  in 
which  time,  if  the  debtor  fail  to  return  and  discharge  the  debt, 
the  Constable  shall  return  the  warrant  to  one  of  the  Select- 
Men   of   the   company,    where   the   goods    are   found,    who, 
shall  issue  orders  to  the  Constable  to  sell  such  a  part  of  said 
goods,  as  shall  amount  to  the  sum  due  :     That  when  the  debt 
exceeds  forty  shillings,  the  return  shall  be  made  to  the  Con 
vention,  who  shall  issue  orders  for  sale. 


The  True  " Declaration"  25 

XII.  That  all  receivers  and  collectors  of  quit-rents,  public 
and  county  taxes,  do  pay  the  same  into  the  hands  of  the 
chairman  of  this  Committee,  to  be  by  them  disbursed  as  the 
public  exigencies  may  require  ;  and  that  such  receivers  and 
collectors  proceed  no  further  in  their  office,  until  they  be 
approved  of  by,  and  have  given  to,  this  Committee,  good  and 
sufficient  security,  for  a  faithful  return  of  such  monies  when 
collected. 

XIII.  That  the  Committee  be  accountable  to  the  county 
for  the  application  of  all  monies  received  from  such  public 
officers. 

XIV.  That  all  these  officers  hold  their  commissions  during 
the  pleasure  of  their  several  constituents. 

XV.  That  this  Committee  will   sustain  all  damages  that 
ever  hereafter  may  accrue  to  all  or  any  of  these  officers  thus 
appointed,  and  thus  acting,  on  account  of  their  obedience  and 
conformity  to  these  Resolves. 

XVI.  That  whatever  person  shall  hereafter  receive  a  com 
mission  from  the  Crown,  or  attempt  to  exercise  any  such 
commission  heretofore  received,  shall  be  deemed  an  enemy  to 
his  country,  and  upon  information  being  made  to  the  Captain 
of  the  company  in  which  he  resides,  the  said  company  shall 
cause  him  to  be  apprehended,  and  conveyed  before  the  two 
Select-Men  of  the  said  company,  who,  upon  proof  of  the  fact, 
shall  commit  him,  the  said  offender,  to  safe  custody,  until  the 
next  sitting  of  the  Committee,  who  shall  deal  with  him  as 
prudence  may  direct. 

XVII.  That  any  person  refusing  to  yield  obedience  to  the 
above  Resolves,   shall  be  considered  equally  criminal,  and 
liable  to  the  same  punishment,  as  the  offenders  above  last 
mentioned. 

XVIII.  That  these  Resolves  be  in  full  force  and  virtue, 
until  instructions  from  the  Provincial  Congress,  regulating  the 
jurisprudence  of  the  province,  shall  provide  otherwise,  or  the 
legislative  body  of  Great-Britain,  resign  its  unjust  and  arbitrary 
pretentions  with  respect  to  America. 

XIX.  That  the  eight  militia  companies  in  the  county,  pro 
vide  themselves  with  proper  arms  and  accoutrements,  and 


26          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

hold  themselves  in  readiness  to  execute  the  commands  and 
directions  of  the  General  Congress  of  this  province  and  this 
Committee. 

XX.  That  the  Committee  appoint  Colonel  Thomas  Polk, 
and  Doctor  Joseph  Kenedy,  to  purchase  300  Ib.  of  powder, 
600  Ib.  of  lead,  1000  flints,  for  the  use  of  the  militia  of  this 
county,  and  deposit  the  same  in  such  place  as  the  Committee 
may  hereafter  direct. 

Signed  by  order  of  the  Committee, 

EPH.  BREVARD,  Clerk  of  the  Committee. 

The  fact  that  these  resolves  were  adopted  in 
Mecklenburg  County  in  May,  1775,  which  is  the 
foundation  of  the  argument  against  the  alleged 
declaration  of  independence  of  the  twentieth  of 
the  same  month,  has  been  denied  by  those  who 
find  them  more  or  less  incompatible  with  the  de 
claration  which  they  uphold,  on  the  ground  that  it 
rests  solely  on  the  authority  of  a  Charleston  news 
paper,  and  that,  although  the  editor  was  a  Tory,  he 
printed  them  without  remark,  thereby  showing  that 
he  was  unwilling  to  vouch  for  their  having  been 
adopted  on  the  date  and  in  the  form  published.1 
This  contention  arises  partly  from  a  lack  of  in 
formation  concerning  Charleston  printers  and  Amer 
ican  newspapers  of  1775.  The  South-Carolina  Ga 
zette;  And  Country  Journal,  which  printed  the 
Mecklenburg  resolves,  was  conducted  by  Charles 
Crouch,  a  sound  Whig,  and  the  one  other  Charleston 
newspaper  published  in  June,  1775,  also  supported 
the  cause  of  the  colonies.2  One  who  searches  the 

1  Geo.  W.  Graham:  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  pp.  43-44,  52.  Cf. 
Gov.  Graham's  Address,  pp.  83-86. 

9  Isaiah  Thomas:  History  of  Printing,  ii.,  pp.  157-169,  366,  371,  and 
private  information  from  Mr.  A.  S.  Salley,  Jr.,  Sec.  Historical  Commission 


The  True  ' '  Declaration "  27 

newspaper  files  of  that  period  will  turn  many  a 
page  to  find  a  word  of  comment  accompanying  any 
public  document  printed  therein.  In  some  of  these 
no  editorial  matter  whatever  was  printed. 

But  another  contemporary  newspaper  has  been 
brought  to  light  which  confirms  the  genuineness 
and  authenticity  of  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  of 
May  31,  1775.  On  Friday,  June  16,  1775,  three 
days  after  the  resolves  were  published  in  Charles 
ton,  they  appeared  in  the  North-Carolina  Gazette? 
printed  weekly  at  New-Bern,  two  hundred  miles 
away.  With  the  exception  of  a  few  words,  mostly 
misprinted,  no  doubt,  the  two  series  of  resolves 
and  their  headings  are  identical  in  form.  The 
dates  of  the  publication  of  the  resolves  in  Charles 
ton  and  New-Bern,  which  are  nearly  equidistant 
from  Charlotte,  being  about  two  hundred  miles 
from  that  town,  precisely  fit  the  situation  in  point 
of  time,  and  indicate  that  they  were  dispatched  from 
Charlotte  by  the  committee  that  adopted  them.  It 
is  incredible  that  both  messengers  should  have  been 
so  deceived  as  to  make  their  arduous  journeys  of 
two  hundred  miles  on  horseback  to  have  published 
in  Charleston  and  New-Bern  a  series  of  resolves 
that  were  adopted  eleven  days  before  their  ac 
credited  date,  as  some  would  have  us  believe,  in  a 

of  South  Carolina.  The  Mecklenburg  resolves  have  often  been  erroneously 
credited  to  the  South- Carolina  Gazette -,  a  third  Charleston  newspaper  of  the 
period.  It  was  conducted  by  Peter  Timothy,  a  patriot  of  patriots,  and  its 
publication  was  suspended  from  April  until  September,  1775. 

1  The   resolves  in   the     North-Carolina   Gazette    are   reprinted    in   the 
Appendix. 


28          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

form  so  different  as  to  change  their  whole  tenor 
and  import,  although  the  date  and  nature  of  the 
true  resolves  were  known,  according  to  the  testi 
mony  of  all  witnesses,  to  nearly  every  man  in 
Mecklenburg  County.  Other  evidence  will  be  ad 
duced  which  confirms  the  form  and  date  of  the 
resolves  published  in  the  Charleston  and  New-Bern 
newspapers. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  Mecklenburg  resolves 
of  May  31,  1775,  constitute  a  virtual  declaration  of 
independence.  They  declare  that  all  civil  and  mili 
tary  commissions  granted  by  the  crown  are  null  and 
void,  and  the  constitution  of  each  colony  wholly  sus 
pended  ;  that  legislative  and  executive  powers  are 
vested  solely  in  the  Provincial  Congress  of  each  col 
ony  ;  that  the  people  of  Mecklenburg  should  there 
fore  form  certain  regulations  for  the  government  of 
the  county ;  that  county  military  officers,  when 
chosen  by  the  people,  shall  exercise  their  powers  by 
virtue  of  such  popular  choice,  and  "  independent  of 
the  Crown  of  Great  Britain  and  former  constitution 
of  this  province";  that  a  body  of  select-men  having 
administrative  and  judicial  powers,  called  a  conven 
tion  or  committee,  shall  be  elected  by  the  people ; 
that  any  person  thereafter  attempting  to  exercise  a 
commission  from  the  crown  shall  be  "  deemed  an 
enemy  to  his  country  ",  committed  to  custody,  and 
dealt  with  as  prudence  may  direct ;  that  all  who  re 
fuse  obedience  to  these  resolves  shall  be  considered 
equally  criminal  ;  and  that  these  resolves  shall  be 
"  in  full  force  and  virtue  until  instructions  from  the 
Provincial  Congress  regulating  the  jurisprudence 


The  True  "  Declaration  "  29 

of  the  province  shall  provide  otherwise,  or  the  legis 
lative  body  of  Great-Britain  resign  its  unjust  and 
arbitrary  pretentious  with  respect  to  America" 

By  declaring  British  authority  and  British  forms 
of  government  to  be  wholly  suspended  in  all  the 
colonies  and  all  legislative  and  executive  powers  to 
be  vested  in  the  Provincial  Congresses,  the  people 
of  Mecklenburg  took  a  more  advanced  step  in  the 
direction  of  independence  than  any  other  organized 
body  of  their  compatriots  had  taken.  British  rule 
was  regarded  as  suspended,  not  annihilated,  and  the 
resolves  were  defeasible  by  a  change  in  the  attitude 
of  the  British  Government;  but  the  document  might 
easily  be  mistaken  for  a  declaration  of  independence. 
It  has  been  repeatedly  called  such  by  intelligent 
critics  of  our  own  day.  In  effect,  Mecklenburg 
County  declared  independence  subject  to  a  contin 
gent  limitation.  The  significance  of  this  limitation 
might  have  been  overlooked  by  many  persons  in 

1775,  and  the  limitation  itself  entirely  forgotten  in 
later  years.     Since  it  so  happened  that  there  was 
no  occasion  to  think  of  the  defeasibility  of  the  re 
solves  in  virtue  of  the  contingency,  and  Mecklenburg 
County  was  never  afterwards  under  British    rule, 
how,  in  years  after  the  great  Declaration  of  July  4, 

1 776,  would  men  of  Mecklenburg  have  been  likely 
to  recall  their  precursive  step,   when   the   precise 
terms  of  the  instrument  by  which  they  had  renounced 
British  authority,  and  which  are  so  essential  in  de 
termining  its  import,  had  passed  out  of  their  minds  ? 
If  we  conclude  that  many  persons  who  were  present 
at  a  meeting  in  Charlotte  in  May,  1 775,  who  saw  and 


30          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

heard  what  transpired,  and  testified  positively  years 
afterwards  that  the  paper  then  adopted  was  a  declar 
ation  of  independence,  could  not  have  been  mis 
taken  as  to  that  fact,  then  we  are  confronted  by  two 
sets  of  resolves  which  wrought  a  fundamental  change 
in  the  civil  government  of  Mecklenburg  County 
in  May,  1775,  one  of  which  was  entirely  forgot 
ten  by  all  who  remembered  the  other. 

The  paper  of  May  31,  1775,  it  should  be  borne  in 
mind, was  not  rescued  from  oblivion  until  after  all  the 
survivors  who  said  they  had  been  present  in  Char 
lotte  when  a  declaration  of  independence  was  made 
had  passed  away;  while  that  of  May  20,  1775, 
which  they  were  called  upon  to  verify  after  a  lapse 
of  half  a  century,  was  pointed  out  to  them  as  a  re 
production  of  an  original  record.  Not  until  the 
publication  in  1853  of  the  certificate  appended  by 
John  McKnitt  Alexander  to  a  copy  of  the  latter 
paper  that  he  gave  to  General  William  R.  Davie, 
did  the  general  public  learn  that  it  was  written  from 
memory  in  1800,  shortly  after  the  destruction  of  the 
records  in  Alexander's  house. 

Reserving  for  critical  analysis  the  document  al 
leged  to  have  been  adopted  on  May  20,  1 775,  the  re 
collections  of  the  aged  witnesses  concerning  the 
terms  of  the  document  which  they  understood  to  be 
a  declaration  of  independence,  and  all  other  eviden 
ces  of  a  later  date  than  1776,  we  shall  consider  (i) 
the  documents  of  May  20,  and  May  31,1775,  in  their 
relation  to  each  other,  assuming  that  both  were 
adopted,  and  in  their  relation  to  the  most  significant 
facts  and  circumstances  associated  with  the  docu- 


The  True  " Declaration"  31 

ment  which  all  the  witnesses  and  participants  at 
the  famous  meeting  had  in  mind,  viewed  in  the 
light  of  contemporaneous  testimony;  (2)  contempo 
raneous  evidence  of  either  document ;  and  (3)  the 
subsequent  conduct  of  reputed  authors  and  sup 
porters  of  the  alleged  declaration  of  independence. 


CHAPTER   III 

THE    RIVAL  DECLARATIONS  COMPARED 

THE  analogous  Mecklenburg  manifestoes  of 
May,  1775,  if  that  of  May  2Oth  be  authentic,  were 
issued  by  the  same  representative  body,  known 
as  the  Committee  of  the  County  of  Mecklenburg. 
The  May  3ist  resolves  were  published  in  con 
temporary  newspapers  as  resolves  of  this  body. 
The  historical  note  accompanying  the  document 
found  among  John  McKnitt  Alexander'spapers,  and 
published  in  the  Raleigh  Register  in  1819,  states  that 
it  was  adopted  by  a  "  delegation,"  or  convention  of 
"  delegates,"  composed  of  two  persons  chosen  from 
each  militia  company  in  Mecklenburg  County  ;  but 
in  his  original  draft  of  this  narrative,  written  in 
1800,  John  McKnitt  Alexander  invariably  refers 
to  the  same  body  as  a  "  Committee''  and  to  its  mem- 
bers  as  "  Committee  Men" ^  These  and  other  dis 
crepancies  indicate  that  the  first  draft  of  the  his 
torical  statement,  which  will  be  examined  later,  was 
revised  at  the  instance  of  John  McKnitt  Alexander 
by  another  person. 

1  Post,  Chap.  IX. 
32 


The  Rival  Declarations  Compared       33 

Several  Mecklenburg  fathers  who  were  called 
upon  to  substantiate  the  facts  set  forth  in  the 
Alexander  narrative  used  the  terms  "  delegation  " 
and  "delegate";  others  said  that  the  body  which 
declared  independence  was  a  "  Committee."  These 
witnesses  tell  substantially  the  same  story,  and  all 
clearly  had  in  mind  the  same  meeting.  General 
Joseph  Graham,  one  of  the  most  intelligent  of 
their  number,  wrote  in  1830  :  "  During  the  Winter 
and  Spring  preceding  the  event,  several  popular 
meetings  of  the  'people  were  held  in  Charlotte, 
two  of  which  I  attended.  .  .  On  the  2oth  of 
May,  1775,  besides  the  two  persons  elected  from 
each  militia  company,  (usually  called  Committee- 
men),  a  much  larger  number  of  citizens  attended  in 
Charlotte  than  at  any  former  meeting — perhaps  half 
the  men  in  the  county."  "  At  the  time  those  resolu 
tions  were  adopted,"  said  General  Graham  in  1835,* 
"there  were  13  militia  companies  in  Mecklenburg 
and  Cabarrus  [then  a  part  of  Mecklenburg]  Coun 
ties  ;  the  practice  was,  at  company  muster,  each 
company  elected  two  of  their  number  as  committee- 
men,  usually  those  for  whom  they  had  the  most 
confidence  in  for  intelligence.  As  well  as  I  can 
remember,  it  was  first  practiced  in  the  Autumn  of 
the  year  1774,  and  had  several  meetings  in  the 
Winter  and  Spring  preceding  the  meeting  of  May, 
1775.  The  Committee  were  continued  for  15  years 

i  Address  of  General  Graham  at  Charlotte,  May  20,  1835,  on  the  occasion 
of  the  celebration  of  the  anniversary  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  in  the 
North  Carolina  Booklet  for  January,  1906,  copied  from  the  Western  Caro 
linian  (Salisbury,  N.  C.),  June  20,  1835. 


34          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

after.  What  time  they  ceased  is  unknown  to  me.'* 
The  Alexander  narrative  also  refers  to  earlier 
meetings  mentioned  by  General  Graham,  and  to 
"the  continued  exertion  of  said  delegation." 

Committees,  now  usually  called  Committees  of 
Safety,  were  established  in  the  counties  and  princi 
pal  towns  of  North  Carolina  in  accordance  with 
the  articles  of  American  Association,  adopted  by 
the  Continental  Congress  in  October,  I774.1  The 
Provincial  Convention  of  August,  1774,  recom 
mended  that  committees  of  five  persons  be  chosen 
in  each  county, 2  but  of  the  few  counties  which 
acted  upon  the  recommendation,  none,  so  far  as  is 
known,  restricted  membership  to  five  persons,  and 
several,  if  not  all,  were  reorganized  after  the  receipt 
of  the  advice  of  the  Continental  Congress  two 
months  later.  The  records  of  some  of  these 
committees  show  a  much  larger  membership 
than  the  Mecklenburg  committee  of  May,  1775. 
According  to  the  combined  recollections  of  men 
who  were  present  at  the  meeting  which  is 
alleged  to  have  issued  a  declaration  of  indepen 
dence,  the  Mecklenburg  committee  had  about 
thirty  members — twenty-six,  if  the  number  of 
militia  companies  given  by  General  Graham  be 
correct.  All  of  the  witnesses  agree  that  it  con 
sisted  of  two  persons  elected  from  each  militia 
company.  Rowan  County,  then  adjacent  to  Meck 
lenburg,  furnishes  one  of  the  earliest  instances 
of  an  election  of  committeemen  from  the  county 

1  Colonial  Records  of  North  Carolina,  ix.  and  x. ,  passim. 
*  Ibid.,  ix.,  1047. 


The  Rival  Declarations  Compared       35 

militia  companies.  New  elections  of  committees 
were  frequent  in  all  counties.  On  February  8, 
1 775,  the  Rowan  committee,  which  was  established 
in  the  autumn  of  1774,  resolved,  "That  it  be 
recommended  to  the  Inhabitants  of  Rowan  County 
that  the  several  Militia  Companies  meet  together, 
and  each  choose  a  Committee  Man,  which  Com 
mittee  so  chosen  shall  meet  at  Salisbury  the  first 

of  March particularly  that  the  said 

Committee  make  such  Resolves  or  adopt  such 
Measures  as  may  enforce  the  observation  of  the 
Resolves  of  the  General  Congress  and  most  effect 
ually  secure  to  America  her  natural  and  political 
privileges."1  This  resembles  the  order  for  the 
election  and  meeting  in  Mecklenburg  referred  to 
in  the  Alexander  narrative.  The  inference,  then, 
to  be  drawn  from  contemporaneous  records,  and 
the  direct  statements  of  John  McKnitt  Alexander 
and  other  witnesses  in  later  years,  prove  that  a 
committee  was  organized  in  Mecklenburg  County 
in  the  fall  of  1774,  that  a  new  committee  was 
elected  in  May,  1775  and  that  this  body  was  the 
"  delegation  "  which  met  in  the  same  month  and 
adopted  the  resolves  which  were  understood  to  be 
a  declaration  of  independence. 

We  have  now  to  deal  with  two  sets  of  resolutions 
adopted  by  the  Mecklenburg  committee  at  meet- 


1  Colonial  Records  of  North  Carolina,  x.,  83-84.  The  proceedings  of 
the  Rowan  Committee  are  erroneously  dated  July  8,  1775,  f°r  they  refer  to 
the  meeting  of  the  Continental  Congress  on  May  10,  1775,  as  a  future 
event.  In  his  History  of  North  Carolina,  p.  363,  John  H.  Wheeler,  copy 
ing  from  the  original  records,  dates  them  February  8,  1775. 


36          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

ings  held  in  May,  1775,  the  one  a  formal  declaration 
of  independence,  made  on  the  2oth  of  the  month, 
the  other,  decidedly  independent  in  spirit,  adopted 
on  the  3 1  st.  Both  declare  the  political  status  of 
the  people  of  MecklenburgCounty,  and  both  provide 
a  system  of  county  government.  Until  very  recent 
ly,  it  has  been  held  that  the  paper  of  May  3ist  fol 
lowed  as  an  appropriate  consequence  of  a  dissolution 
of  all  political  connection  with  Great  Britain  by  the 
declaration  of  the  2oth  :  it  was  said  to  be  "  an  au 
thentic  document,  founded  on  that  declaration,  and 
meant  to  carry  its  principles  into  action."  1  The 
intrinsic  evidence  of  the  document  of  May  31,  1775, 
shows  that  it  had  no  relation  to  an  antecedent  decla 
ration  of  independence.  It  contains  not  a  hint  of 
the  declaration  which  is  presumed  to  have  been  its 
foundation,  but  proceeds  on  the  assumption,  ex 
pressly  stated  in  the  preamble,  that  British  author 
ity  was  suspended,  not  by  the  men  of  Mecklenburg, 
but  by  a  declaration  of  Parliament  that  the  colonies 
were  in  actual  rebellion.  If  the  document  of  May 
2Oth  be  genuine,  then  a  representative  body  assem 
bled  in  Charlotte  on  May  igth,  vested  with  unlimited 
authority,  adopted  certain  measures  after  a  public 
discussion  and  two  days  sitting,  which  were  unani 
mously  approved  by  a  vast  concourse  of  people,  and 
met  again  eleven  days  later  to  do  it  all  over  again 
in  a  milder  way.  On  the  2Oth  of  May  the  com- 
mitteemen  declared  the  people  of  Mecklenburg  to 
be  free  and  independent  of  Great  Britain,  adopted 

1  Dr.  Hawks' s  Lecture,  Cooke's  Rev  j  Hist,  of  N.  C.,  77;  Gov.  Graham's 
Address,  8l  et  seq. 


The  Rival  Declarations  Compared      37 

all  their  former  laws,  reinstated  in  their  commands 
military  officers  who  conformed  to  the  new  "  regula 
tions,"  as  they  were  called,  and  assumed  to  them 
selves,  in  the  character  of  justices  of  the  peace  and 
committeemen,  all  judicial  and  administrative  au 
thority.  "  A  number  of  bye-laws  were  also  added," 
says  the  Alexander  narrative,  "  merely  to  protect  the 
association  from  confusion,  and  to  regulate  their 
general  conduct  as  citizens," — "  bye-laws  and  regula 
tions  for  the  government  of  a  standing  Committee 
of  Public  Safety,"  wrote  Humphrey  Hunter,  who 
was  present.  The  county  government  thus  pro 
vided  for  was  to  continue  in  operation,  "  until  a 
more  general  and  organized  government  be  estab 
lished  in  this  province."  On  May  3ist  the  com 
mitteemen  met  again  and  abrogated  British  laws 
which  had  been  eleven  days  abrogated  and  adopted 
as  a  "  rule  of  life  "  for  the  people  of  independent 
Mecklenburg  County;  vacated  offices  held  under  the 
crown  which  had  been  eleven  days  vacated  and 
partly  or  wholly  filled  by  new  appointments ;  de 
prived  of  their  commands  the  military  officers  rein 
stated  on  the  20th  by  ordering  an  election  of  new 
ones  by  popular  vote  ;  and  legislated  themselves  out 
of  office  by  resolving  that  civil  officers  should  be 
elected  to  perform  the  identical  duties  which  they 
had  imposed  upon  themselves  eleven  days  earlier! 
"A  number  of  bye-laws  were  added,  merely  to  pro 
tect  the  association  from  confusion,  and  to  regulate 
their  general  conduct  as  citizens."  No  reasons  for 
this  anomalous  second  action  are  given.  No  al 
lusion  is  made  to  the  previous  action.  To  com- 


38          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

plete  the  work  of  undoing  and  doing  again  in  a 
milder  way  all  that  had  been  done  on  the  2Oth, 
which  had  met  with  universal  satisfaction,  and  which 
was  now  ignored,  the  committeemen  of  the  3ist 
annulled  their  declaration  of  independence  :  they 
now  declared  that  the  constitution  of  the  province 
was  only  suspended,  and  that  the  new  order  of 
things  should  continue  "  until  instructions  from  the 
Provincial  Congress  regulating  the  jurisprudence  of 
this  province  shall  provide  otherwise,  or  the  legis 
lative  body  of  Great  Britain  resign  its  unjust  and 
arbitrary pretentions  with  respect  to  A  merica. "  Can 
it  be  believed  that  half  the  men  of  Mecklenburg 
County  acclaimed  with  shouts  of  joy  an  irrevocable 
declaration  of  independence,  saw  their  representa 
tives  pledge  their  lives,  fortunes,  and  sacred  honor 
to  maintain  it,  and  permitted  the  same  men  to  as 
semble  on  the  same  spot  eleven  days  later  to  recant 
their  bold  words  ? 

Few  attempts  have  been  made  to  explain  away 
the  fact  that  the  document  of  May  2Oth  is  con 
tradicted  by  and  inconsistent  with  the  document  of 
May  3ist.  Only  one  need  be  noticed.  It  has 
been  suggested  that  the  patriots  of  Mecklenburg 
were  precipitated  by  the  news  of  the  battle  of 
Lexington  into  an  act  which  on  cooler  reflection 
they  recognized  to  be  premature  and  damaging 
to  the  cause  of  the  colonies ;  that  they  mag 
nanimously  met  eleven  days  later  and  adopted 
another  series  of  resolutions  pitched  in  a  lower 
key,  which  were  hurried  into  print,  and  that  meas 
ures  were  taken  in  Mecklenburg  and  in  other  parts 


The  Rival  Declarations  Compared       39 

of  the  province  to  suppress  the  declaration  of  in 
dependence.1  This  hypothesis  is  rebutted  by  the 
very  men  whose  testimony  is  mainly  relied  upon  to 
support  that  declaration.  They  point  with  pride  to 
the  fact  that  the  resolutions  they  remembered  were 
sustained  with  firmness  and  energy,  and  that  the 
"  harmony,  unanimity,  and  exertion  in  the  cause  of 
liberty  and  independence,  evidently  resulting  from 
these  regulations,  and  the  continued  exertion  of 
said  delegation,  apparently  tranquilised  this  sec 
tion  of  the  State,  and  met  with  the  concurrence 
and  high  approbation  of  the  Council  of  Safety, 
who  held  their  sessions  at  Newbern  and  Wil 
mington.  .  .  ."  Captain  James  Jack,  who  tells  us 
that  he  bore  the  resolutions  to  Philadelphia  to  lay 
them  before  the  Continental  Congress,  vividly  re 
collected  how  they  were  read  in  open  court  when 
he  passed  through  Salisbury,  in  the  adjoining 
county  of  Rowan,  and  approved  by  all.  Captain 
Jack  is  known  to  have  left  Charlotte  after  May  31, 
1775.  Not  one  of  the  fourteen  who  said  that 
they  were  present  in  Charlotte  in  May,  1775,  or 
thereabouts,  when  independence  was  declared,  re 
called  that  two  series  of  resolves  were  adopted  in 
that  month  which  overturned  the  civil  government 
of  Mecklenburg  County,  or  intimated  that  the 
declaration  of  independence  was  suppressed  in 
Mecklenburg  or  elsewhere  in  North  Carolina. 

The  intrinsic  evidence  of  the  rival  declarations, 
strengthened  by  the  fact  that  the  witnesses  remem- 

1  New  York  Herald,  May  3,  1875,  editorial.     Cf.  Dr.  Hawks's  Lecture^ 
Cooke,  91,  and  Gov.  Graham  s  Address,  83-84. 


40          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

bered  only  one  such  document,  which  was  not 
suppressed  or  superseded,  is  strongly  against  the 
theory  that  both  were  adopted.  Their  similarity 
indicates  that  one  is  the  basis  of  the  other.  The 
advocates  of  the  document  of  May  20,  1775,  re 
cently  saw  that  their  only  logical  position  was  to 
deny  that  the  May  3ist  resolves  were  adopted  on 
the  date  and  in  the  form  published  in  the  South- 
Carolina  Gazette-,  And  Country  Journal  of  June 
13,  1775,  and  to  argue  that  they  were  drawn  up 
before  the  receipt  of  the  news  of  Lexington,  and 
amended  on  the  2Oth  into  a  declaration  of  inde 
pendence.  This  position  has  been  rendered  un 
tenable  by  the  discovery  of  a  copy  of  the  North- 
Carolina  Gazette  of  June  16,  1775,  containing  the 
same  resolves  under  the  same  date  as  were  printed 
in  the  Charleston  newspaper.  But  we  have  not  to 
rely  wholly  upon  newspapers  for  contemporary 
proofs  that  the  May  3ist  resolves  were  adopted. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE    LOST    "  CAPE-FEAR    MERCURY  " 

THE  men  who  attended  a  meeting  of  the  Meck 
lenburg  committee  in  May,  1775,  and  testified  in 
later  years  that  a  declaration  of  independence  was 
adopted,  state  that  it  was  read  by  Colonel  Thomas 
Polk  from  the  steps  of  the  court-house  in  Charlotte 
before  "  perhaps  half  the  men  in  the  county,"  or 
"the  males  generally."  Four  said  that  "the  reso 
lutions  had  considerable  effect  in  harmonizing  the 
people  in  two  or  three  adjoining  counties."  We 
have  seen  that  none  intimated  that  they  were  sup 
pressed  in  any  part  of  the  province  of  North 
Carolina,  and  that  Captain  James  Jack  stated  that 
they  were  read  aloud  in  open  court  at  Salisbury, 
which  is  forty  miles  distant  from  Charlotte,  early 
in  June,  1775.  Assuming  that  they  were  sup 
pressed,  can  it  be  believed  that  nobody  in  Meck 
lenburg  or  Rowan  County  could  have  been  im 
prudent  enough  to  spread  the  startling  news 
that  the  inhabitants  of  Mecklenburg  had  formally 
declared,  at  a  large  public  meeting,  that  they  were 
free  and  independent  of  Great  Britain  ?  And  did 

41 


42  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Whigs  and  Tories  conspire  to  keep  it  secret  ?  One 
who  was  present  in  Salisbury  states  that  the  news 
brought  by  Captain  Jack  caused  a  great  stir  among 
the  Tories  of  the  town,  and  that  their  leaders  tried 
to  prevent  Jack  from  proceeding  to  Philadelphia.1 
The  Tories  of  Mecklenburg  would  have  hurried  to 
the  British  authorities  in  spite  of  efforts  to  suppress 
it,  and  the  declaration  of  independence  would  soon 
have  been  known  and  discussed  in  all  parts  of  the 
colony.  Notwithstanding  this  fact,  a  search  ex 
tending  over  a  period  of  nearly  a  century,  begun 
at  a  time  when  a  great  mass  of  contemporary 
records  now  lost  were  extant,  has  produced  but 
one  item  of  contemporary  evidence  which  the  ad 
vocates  of  the  document  of  May  20,  1775,  rely 
upon  to  prove  its  authenticity.  The  document  is 
alleged  to  have  been  printed  in  the  Cape-Fear 
Mercury,  a  newspaper  printed  in  Wilmington, 
North  Carolina  ;  for  Governor  Josiah  Martin's  de 
scriptions  of  a  manifesto  of  Mecklenburg  County 
contained  in  a  copy  of  this  newspaper  which  he 
sent  to  England — and  which  disappeared  from  the 
British  State  Paper  Office  in  1837  under  circum 
stances  which  indicate,  it  is  said,  that  it  contained 
the  document  of  May  2Oth — apply  to  nothing  less 
than  a  declaration  of  independence.  A  plausible 
argument  has  been  advanced  to  prove  that  the 
resolutions  of  May  2Oth  in  Martin's  History  of 

»  MS.  of  Adam  Brevard,  brother  of  Ephraim  Brevard,  dated  July  13, 
1824,  copied  into  Wheeler's  Reminiscences  and  Memoirs  of  North  Caro 
lina,  241-243,  from  the  Southern  Home  for  July  5,  1875.  Cf.  Gen.  Jos. 
Graham's  testimony. 


The  Lost  " Cape-Fear  Mercury"        43 

North  Carolina  were  copied  from  the  Cape-Fear 
Mercury}*  In  treating  the  testimony  of  Governor 
Martin,  we  fortunately  have  access  to  all  of  his 
correspondence  with  the  home  government,  his 
proclamations,  and  the  records  of  his  Council. 

During  the  last  week  in  May,  1775,  Governor 
Martin  was  compelled  by  fear  of  personal  violence 
to  flee  from  his  palace  at  New-Bern,  the  seat  of 
government,  and  to  take  refuge  at  Fort  Johnston, 
at  the  mouth  of  the  Cape  Fear  River,  about  thirty 
miles  below  Wilmington.  Here  he  was  soon  cut 
off  to  a  great  extent  from  communication  with 
loyalists  in  the  interior  of  the  province  by  the 
vigilance  of  the  town  and  county  committees. 
The  earliest  mention  of  this  fact  in  the  Governor's 
correspondence  is  contained  in  a  letter  of  July  6, 
1775,  to  the  Earl  of  Dartmouth,  the  British  Sec 
retary  for  the  Colonies,  in  which  he  said  that  a 
servant  whom  he  had  dispatched  to  the  post-office 
at  Wilmington  for  his  letters  three  days  before  was 
stopped  by  the  committee  of  the  town  of  Bruns 
wick  and  obliged  to  swear  that  he  had  no  letters 
for  him  before  he  was  allowed  to  proceed.2  But 
Governor  Martin  had  a  large  following  in  the  pro 
vince,  particularly  in  the  upper  and  middle  Cape 
Fear  regions,  and  it  would  have  been  physically 
impossible  for  the  patriot  party  to  prevent  the 
news  of  a  declaration  of  independence  publicly 
proclaimed  in  Mecklenburg  County  from  reaching 

1  George  W.  Graham:  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration. 
9  Col.  Rec.  ofN.  €.,  x.,  43-44,  69. 


44          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

him.1  Wilmington  was  the  principal  trading  town 
of  the  province,  the  stronghold  of  the  Whig  party 
in  the  populous  Cape  Fear  section,  famous  for  its 
early  and  active  support  of  the  cause  of  the  country, 
and  the  home  of  many  of  the  most  influential  Whigs 
of  North  Carolina,  such  as  Cornelius  Harnett, 
whom  Josiah  Quincy  called  "  the  Samuel  Adams 
of  North  Carolina,"  the  Ashes,  William  Hooper, 
Archibald  MacLaine,  and  others ;  but  there  was  a 
large  body  of  Tories  in  the  town,2  and  had  it  been 
known  there  that  Mecklenburg  County  declared  in 
dependence,  oral  intelligence,  if  not  the  declaration 
itself,  would  have  quickly  reached  Governor  Martin. 
A  proclamation  issued  by  Governor  Martin  from 
Fort  Johnston  on  June  16,  I775,3  nearly  a  month 
after  the  alleged  promulgation  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration,  shows  that  he  had  not  heard  of  it  at 
that  late  date.  His  thunderbolts  were  directed 
against  "  sundry  ill-disposed  persons,"  particularly 
in  the  county  of  Brunswick,  who  were  endeavoring 
by  u  false,  seditious,  and  scandalous  reports  "  "  to 
engage  the  People  to  subscribe  papers  obliging 
themselves  to  be  prepared  with  Arms,  to  array 
themselves  in  companies,  and  to  submit  to  the 
illegal  and  usurped  authorities  of  Committees,  cover 
ing  their  flagitious  and  abominable  designs  with 
pretended  apprehensions  of  intestine  insurrections 
and  professions  of  duty  and  allegiance  to  the  King, 

1  Wm.  E.  Dodd :  Life  of  Nathaniel  Macon,  19-21  ;  Sabine's  Loyalists 
of  the  American  Revolution,  i.,  36.  Sabine  holds  that  the  loyalist  party  in 
North  Carolina  was  as  numerous  as  the  Whigs. 

s  Col.  Rec.  ofN.  C,  x.,  48.  »  Ibid.,  x.,  16-19. 


The  Lost  "  Cape-Fear  Mercury  "        45 

in  order  the  more  effectually  to  deceive  and  betray 
the  innocent  and  unwary  people  into  the  most 
flagrant  violations  thereof."  It  is  clear  that  Gov 
ernor  Martin  knew  nothing  of  a  declaration  of  inde 
pendence  emanating  from  Mecklenburg  County ; 
nor  had  he  seen  the  May  3ist  resolves,  for  they 
contain  no  professions  of  duty  to  the  king  and 
only  a  tacit  acknowledgement  of  allegiance.  The 
May  3  ist  resolves  were  first  published  in  North  Car 
olina  on  June  i6th,  the  day  on  which  this  proclama 
tion  was  issued.  They  appeared  in  the  North  Caro 
lina  Gazette,  of  New-Bern,  on  that  day.  New- Bern 
was  about  a  hundred  miles  from  Fort  Johnston  ; 
Governor  Martin  had  few  sympathizers  there,1  and 
advices  from  them  were  no  doubt  very  infrequent. 
Before  proceeding  to  Governor  Martin's  refer 
ences  to  an  extraordinary  publication  of  Meck 
lenburg  County,  an  event  will  be  noticed  which 
should  be  considered  in  connection  with  them,  and 
which  reveals  at  the  same  time  the  political  senti 
ments  of  the  Whig  leaders  of  North  Carolina  at 
this  moment  and  their  ignorance  of  the  supposed 
declaration  of  independence.  On  June  20,  1775, 
four  days  after  the  date  of  the  governor's  pro 
clamation,  a  general  meeting  of  the  committees  of 
the  Wilmington  district  was  held  in  the  town  of 
Wilmington.2  This  body  adopted  the  "  Associa 
tion"  agreed  to  by  the  committee  of  New  Hanover 
County  on  June  iQth,  which,  with  some  textual 
changes,  was  the  same  as  that  agreed  to  at  Charles- 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C1.,  x.,  43. 

2  Ibid.,  x.,  24-29  ;  proceedings  of  the  meeting. 


46          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

ton  on  June  3d,  in  the  Provincial  Congress  of  South 
Carolina.  The  Association  was  drawn  up  after  the 
receipt  of  the  news  of  Lexington,  and  was  the 
boldest  document  other  than  the  Mecklenburg 
resolves  of  May  31,  1775,  that  had  been  put  for 
ward  up  to  that  time  in  the  Carolinas.  It  is  best 
known  as  the  "  Cumberland  Association,"  having 
been  later  adopted  by  the  committee  for  the  county 
of  Cumberland.  Its  subscribers  solemnly  engaged 
to  associate  as  a  band  for  the  defence  of  their  rights, 
and  to  go  forth  and  be  ready  to  sacrifice  their 
lives  and  fortunes  at  the  call  of  the  Provincial  or 
Continental  Congresses  ;  "  This  obligation",  it  ran, 
"  to  continue  in  full  force  until  a  reconciliation 
shall  take  place  between  Great  Britain  and  America^ 
upon  constitutional  principles,  an  event  we  most 
ardently  desire,  and  we  will  hold  those  persons 
inimical  to  the  liberties  of  the  Colonies  who  shall 
refuse  to  subscribe  this  Association."  Though  driven 
to  arms  in  defence  of  their  constitutional  rights,  inde 
pendence  was  not  the  aim  nor  the  wish  of  the  in 
habitants  of  the  Wilmington  district,  nor,  as  far  as 
contemporaneous  records  show,  of  any  organised 
body  of  men  in  America  at  this  time.  The  same 
meeting  that  adopted  the  Association  appointed 
Robert  Howe,  Archibald  MacLaine,  and  Samuel 
Ashe, three  of  the  most  able  and  active  patriots  in  the 
colony,  to  draw  up  a  reply  to  the  Governor's  procla 
mation  of  the  i6th  of  June.  They  reported  a 
document  which  stated  that  unconstitutional  and 
oppressive  acts  of  Parliament  had  laid  the  people  of 
the  colony  under  the  necessity  of  appointing  Com- 


The  Lost  "  Cape-Fear  Mercury  "        47 

mittees  for  the  several  districts,  towns,  and  counties, 
and  that  "  as  his  Excellency  has  endeavored  by  his 
Proclamation  to  weaken  the  influence  and  prejudice 
the  characters  of  those  Committees  and  the  persons 
appointed  under  them  by  wantonly,  cruelly,  and 
unjustly  representing  them  as  ill-disposed  people, 
propagating  false  and  scandalous  reports,  deroga 
tory  to  the  honor  and  justice  of  the  King,  and  also 
by  other  illiberal  and  scandalous  imputations  ex 
pressed  in  the  said  Proclamation :  We,  then,  the  Com 
mittees  of  the  counties  of  New  Hanover,  Brunswick, 
Bladen,  Duplin,  and  Onslow,  in  order  to  prevent 
the  pernicious  influence  of  the  said  Proclamation, 
do  unanimously  resolve  that  in  our  opinion  his 
Excellency,  Josiah  Martin,  Esq.,  hath  by  the  said 
Proclamation,  and  by  the  whole  tenor  of  his  con 
duct  since  the  unhappy  disputes  between  Great 
Britain  and  the  colonies,  discovered  himself  to  be 
an  enemy  to  the  happiness  of  this  colony  in  par 
ticular  and  to  the  freedom,  rights,  and  privileges  of 
America  in  general."  It  is  incredible  that  the 
authors  of  this  paper,  who  thus  emphatically  belie 
the  Governor's  imputations  that  the  committees 
of  the  province  were  acting  otherwise  than  as  sub 
jects  of  King  George  III.  contending  for  their 
political  rights,  and  driven  to  extreme  measures, 
could  have  known  that  the  committee  of  Meck 
lenburg  County  declared  independence  of  Great 
Britain  a  month  before.  And  yet,  if  there  was 
such  a  declaration,  it  would  certainly  have  been 
made  known  to  them  and  to  many  others  in  the 
large  district  which  they  represented. 


48          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Before  the  meeting  at  Wilmington  adjourned, 
(June  21,  1775),  the  Association  and  the  reply  to 
the  Governor's  proclamation  were  ordered  to  be 
published  in  the  newspapers.  They  appeared,  in 
all  probability,  in  the  Cape-Fear  Mercury  of  Friday, 
June  23,  1775.  This  paper  was  printed  weekly  at 
Wilmington  under  the  patronage  of  the  local  com 
mittee  by  Adam  Boyd,  one  of  its  members.1  The 
Cape-Fear  Mercury  and  the  North-Carolina  Ga 
zette  were  the  only  newspapers  published  in  the 
province. 

By  June  25th,  the  news  of  both  an  extraordinary 
publication  of  Mecklenburg  County  and  of  the  meet 
ing  at  Wilmington  had  reached  Governor  Martin. 
He  addressed  the  Council  held  at  Fort  Johnston  on 
that  day  as  follows  : 2  "  The  seditious  Combinations 
that  have  been  formed  and  are  still  forming  in  sev 
eral  parts  of  this  Colony  and  the  violent  measures 
they  pursue  in  compelling  His  Majesty's  Subjects 
by  various  kinds  of  intimidations  to  subscribe  As 
sociations  inconsistent  with  their  Duty  and  alle- 
gience  to  their  Sovereign,  The  obliging  People  to 
frequent  meetings  in  Arms,  by  the  usurped  Author 
ity  of  Committees,  the  recent  Assemblage  of  a  Body 
of  armed  Men  in  the  town  of  Wilmington  for  the 
purpose  of  awing  His  Majesty's  Loyal  Subjects  there 
into  submission  to  the  dictates  of  an  illegal  and  ty 
rannical  tribunal  erected  there  under  that  name,3  and 

1  Stephen  B.  Weeks  :  Press  of  N.  C.  in  the  i8th  Century,  33. 

2  Col  Rec.  of  N.  C.,x.,  38-39. 

3  The  Governor  refers  to  the  general  meeting  of  the  committees  at  Wil 
mington  on  June  2Oth  and  2ist,  and  the  signing  of  the  Association  by  the 
inhabitants  of  the  town.     See  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.  x.,  236. 


The  Lost  " Cape-Fear  Mercury"        49 

the  late  most  treasonable  publication  of  a  Commit 
tee  in  the  County  of  Mecklenburg  explicitly  re 
nouncing  obedience  to  His  Majesty's  Government 
and  all  lawfull  authority  whatsoever,  are  such  auda 
cious  and  dangerous  proceedings,  and  so  directly 
tending  to  the  dissolution  of  the  Constitution  of  this 
Province,  That  I  have  thought  it  indispensably  my 
Duty  to  advise  with  you  on  the  measures  proper  to 
be  taken  for  the  maintenance  of  His  Majesty's 
Government  and  the  Constitution  of  this  Country, 
thus  flagrantly  insulted  and  violated."  Governor 
Martin's  description  of  the  publication  of  the  Meck 
lenburg  Committee  would  apply  to  a  formal  decla 
ration  of  independence  ;  yet  he  puts  it  in  the  same 
class  with  other  "seditious"  proceedings  "directly 
tending  to  the  dissolution  of  the  Constitution  of 
this  Province,"  particularly  the  signing  of  the  new 
Association. 

On  June  30,  1775,  five  days  after  the  meeting 
of  the  Council,  Governor  Martin  wrote  from 
Fort  Johnston  to  the  Earl  of  Dartmouth,  the 
British  Secretary  of  State  for  the  American  De 
partment.  1  "  The  Resolves  of  the  Committee  of 
Mecklenburgh,"  he  said,  "which  your  Lordship  will 
find  in  the  enclosed  Newspaper,  surpass  all  the  hor 
rid  and  treasonable  publications  that  the  inflamma 
tory  spirits  of  this  Continent  have  yet  produced,  and 
your  Lordship  may  depend  its  Authors  and  Abettors 
will  not  escape  my  due  notice  whenever  my  hands 
are  sufficiently  strengthened  to  attempt  the  recov 
ery  of  the  lost  authority  of  Government.  A  copy 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.   C.,  x,  41-50. 
4 


50          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

of  these  Resolves  I  am  informed  were  sent  off  by 
express  to  the  Congress  at  Philadelphia  as  soon  as 
they  were  passed  in  the  Committee."  The  gover 
nor  refers  to  only  three  enclosures  in  this  letter — 
a  newspaper,  his  proclamation  of  June  i6th,  and 
the  minutes  of  the  Council  at  Fort  Johnston  on 
June  25th.  Of  his  proclamation  he  wrote  :  "  The 
Newspaper  enclosed  will  show  your  Lordship  that 
the  same  spirit  of  sedition  and  extravagance  that  gave 
cause  to  that  Act  of  Government  has  produced  an 
impudent  and  formal  contradiction  of  the  undeniable 
truths  it  contains,  under  the  authority  of  a  Com 
mittee.  .  .  .  According  to  custom  and  as  the  last 
resort  of  malice  and  falsehood,  your  Lordship  will 
find  this  Publication  prescribes  me  as  an  Enemy  to 
this  Province  in  particular  and  to  America  in  Gen 
eral,  .  .  ."  The  governor  plainly  referred  to 
the  reply  made  to  his  proclamation  by  the  general 
committee  at  Wilmington  on  June  2ist,  which,  as 
we  have  seen,  was  ordered  on  that  day  to  be  printed 
in  the  newspapers,  and  which  most  probably 
appeared  in  the  Cape-Fear  Mercury  of  June  23d, 
the  organ  of  the  Wilmington  Committee. 

The  original  dispatch  of  Governor  Martin  of 
June  30,  1775,  is  in  the  Public  Record  Office  in 
London,  together  with  the  proclamation  and  min 
utes  of  the  Council,  but  the  third  inclosure,  the 
newspaper,  is  missing.  Written  across  the  back  of 
the  dispatch  is  this  pencilled  note  :  "  A  Printed 
Paper  taken  out  by  Mr.  Turner  for  Mr.  Stevenson, 
August  1 5th  1837."  Andrew  Stevenson,  of  Virginia, 
was  American  Minister  at  the  Court  of  St.  James, 


The  Lost  "  Cape-Fear  Mercury"        51 

1836-1841.  He  never  took  part  in  the  discussion 
of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  and,  according  to 
a  memorandum  found  among  his  papers  after  his 
death,  the  newspaper  was  borrowed  for  another 
person.1  It  was  removed  from  the  British  State 
Paper  Office  at  a  time  when  Jefferson  was  openly 
charged  with  plagiarism,  and  the  failure  to  return  it 
has  been  regarded  by  the  most  recent  advocates  of 
the  document  of  May  20,  1775,  as  presumptive 
evidence  that  it  contained  that  document.2  Had 
the  matter  rested  thus,  the  Mecklenburg  contro 
versy  might  have  gone  on  forever.  But  all  of  Lord 
Dartmouth's  American  papers  are  not  on  file  in  the 
Public  Record  Office,  and  among  his  manuscripts 
in  the  possession  of  the  present  Earl  of  Dartmouth 

1  New  York  Herald,  May  iq,  1875,  containing  Herald  correspondent's 
interview  with  Andrew  Stevenson's  son,  Senator  John  W.  Stevenson. 

2  Dr.  Geo.  W.  Graham  devotes  several  pages  of  his  volume  on  the  Meck 
lenburg  Declaration  to  the  Cape-Fear  Mercury  episode.     He  argues  that 
Dr.  Hawks's  article  in  the  New-  York  Review  for  March,  1837,  in  which  he 
charged  Jefferson   with   plagiarism,   "announced   that   the    Mecklenburg 
Declaration  was  first  published  in  the  Cape-Fear  Mercury  in  June,  1775, 
which  paper  was  still  preserved  in  the  Colonial  Archives  in  England  "  ; 
that  Andrew  Stevenson,  a  friend  of  Jefferson,  therefore  borrowed  the  news 
paper  and  never  returned  it ;  that  "Jared  Sparks,  the  historian,  visited 
London  in  search  of  that  copy  of  the  Mercury  in  1840-41,  and  of  course 
must  have  made  the  acquaintance  of  Mr.  Stevenson  "  ;  and  that  during  the 
twenty  years  previous  to  Mr.  Stevenson's  death  in  1857,  when  the  contro 
versy  as  to  the  genuineness  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  had  become 
intensified  by  Mr.  Force's  discovery  of  the  May  3ist  resolves,   "  nowhere 
do  we  find  that  Mr.  Stevenson  ever  participated  in  the  debate,  although, 
with  the  Cape- Fear  Mercury  in  his  possession,  he  could  have  settled  the 
controversy  for  all  time."  In  point  of  fact,  Dr.  Hawks  "announced"  in  the 
New  York  Review  that  "  the  Mecklenburg  document  was  first  published  in 
a  newspaper  of  North  Carolina,  called  '  The  Cape  Fear  Mercury,' "  and  as 
authority  for  his  statement    quoted  Governor    Martin's    proclamation  of 
August  8,   1775,  which  had  been  found  and   made  public  several  years 


52          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

is  a  duplicate  of  Governor  Martin's  dispatch  of 
June  30,  1775,  which  contains,  in  place  of  a  news 
paper,  a  manuscript  copy  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Resolves  of  May  31,  1775.  The  duplicate  dispatch 
is  in  the  same  clerk's  or  secretary's  hand  and  in  the 
same  words  as  the  original  in  the  Public  Record 
Office,  and  is  signed  by  the  Governor.  Both  were 
numbered  34  by  Governor  Martin's  secretary. 
The  duplicate  is  indorsed  :  "  North  Carolina.  Fort 

before.  Dr.  Hawks  knew  nothing  of  any  copy  of  the  newspaper  in  Eng 
land,  or  of  any  correspondence  of  Governor  Martin  concerning  the  Meck 
lenburg  resolves.  Jared  Sparks  was  ignorant  of  it  when  he  went  to  Europe 
to  make  transcripts  of  MSS.  relating  to  America.  In  a  volume  in  the 
Sparks  Collection  (Harvard  University  Library),  entitled  Selections  and 
Memoranda  made  in  the  Public  Offices  of  London  and  Paris  and  in  the 
British  Museum^  1840-41 ',  there  is  an  extract  from  Governor  Martin's  letter 
of  June  30,  1775,  and  the  following  note  by  Mr.  Sparks.  "The  news 
paper  referred  to  above  is  not  among  the  files  in  the  State  Paper 
Office,  but  it  was  undoubtedly  the  'Cape  Fear  Gazette'  [over  the 
word  Gazette  is  written  in  the  same  hand  'Mercury?'].  The  ex 
tract  furnishes  a  proof,  that  the  Resolves,  as  they  were  actually 
passed,  were  the  same  as  contained  in  the  Newspaper;  and  that  the  Re 
solves  published  recently  in  North  Carolina,  purporting  to  be  copied  from 
a  manuscript  found  among  the  papers  of  General  Davie,  are  essentially 
altered  from  the  original,  and  that  this  alteration  took  place  after  the 
*  Declaration  of  Independence.'  I  believe  Mr.  Peter  Force  has  in  his  pos 
session  the  Newspaper,  which  contains  the  original  resolves. — I  think,  also, 
that  they  have  been  reprinted,  within  the  last  year  or  two,  in  the 
'Southern  Literary  Messenger' at  Richmond."  The  May  3ist  resolves 
were  partly  printed  in  the  Soiithern  Literary  Messenger  of  June,  1839. 
Jared  Sparks  was  the  first  to  call  attention  to  Governor  Martin's  letter  of 
June  30,  1775.  He  stated  that  the  newspaper  alluded  to  could  not  be 
found.  (Gov.  Swain  in  Cooke's  Rev'y  Hist,  of  N.  C.,  105.)  It  is  entirely 
gratuitous  to  suppose  that  Andrew  Stevenson  stole  the  newspaper  loaned  to 
him  as  a  courtesy  of  the  Keeper  of  the  British  State  Papers,  or  that  he 
ever  examined  it  or  knew  its  importance  when  it  was  in  his  possession,  and 
withheld  it  from  the  public  for  twenty  years.  It  is  much  more  probable 
that  it  was  lost  before  any  one  saw  it  who  could  appreciate  its  significance. 
If  the  person  who  borrowed  it  in  Stevenson's  name  had  produced  it  during 
those  twenty  years,  it  would  not,  as  Graham  supposes,  have  settled 
the  Mecklenburg  question.  In  his  lecture  before  the  N.  Y.  Historical 


T-H  S 


•CAPEJTEAR 


TCJRY: 


The  spurious  Cape-Fear  Mercury,  Friday,  June  3rd,  1775. 


The  Lost  "Cape-Fear  Mercury "        53 

Johnston.  30  June  1775.  Governor  Martin.  N°  34 
(Duplicate  original  not  recd.)  R.  Septr  10  1775  (3 
Inclosures)  Entd."  The  manuscript  copy  of  the 
Mecklenburg  resolves  bears  the  indorsement :  "  In 
Govr  Martin's  of  the  30  of  June,  1 775,  N°.  34."  The 
resolves  do  not  agree  verbatim  with  those  in  the 
Charleston  paper  of  June  13, 1775,  or  with  those  in 
the  New-Bern  paper  of  June  16,  1775,  and  they  are 
not  dated ;  but  there  is  no  material  difference 

Society  in  1852,  Dr.  Hawks,  who  was  then  the  foremost  advocate  of  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration,  said  that  Governor  Martin's  description  of  the 
resolves  in  the  Cape-Fear  Mercury,  applied  exactly  to  the  May  3ist 
resolves  ;  and  in  his  address  at  Charlotte  in  1857  he  spoke  of  the  publica 
tion  of  the  resolves  in  Wilmington  as  an  established  fact.  Governor  Swain 
wrote  Bancroft,  March  18,  1858,  that  it  was  then  "  conceded  on  all  sides 
that  the  Resolutions  of  the  31  May  were  the  Resolutions  published  in  the 
Cape-Fear  Mercury  and  transmitted  by  Gov.  Martin  to  the  English 
government."  In  1864,  when  the  advocates  of  the  document  of  May  2Oth 
had  begun  to  change  their  ground,  Col.  John  H.  Wheeler  visited  London 
and  learned  from  the  memorandum  on  the  back  of  Governor  Martin's  letter 
that  the  newspaper  had  been  taken  out  for  Mr.  Stevenson.  Up  to  that 
time,  as  far  as  the  writer  has  been  able  to  ascertain,  the  literature  of  the 
question  fails  to  disclose  a  single  intimation  that  there  was  ever  a  copy  of 
the  Cape-Fear  Mercury  in  the  British  archives.  Colonel  Wheeler  treated 
the  loss  of  the  paper  as  an  unfortunate  accident.  It  has  remained  for 
more  recent  writers  to  assert  that  Jefferson's  defenders  destroyed  the 
evidence  of  the  authenticity  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration.  To  confirm 
their  theories  and  to  put  upon  the  market  a  clever  forgery,  S.  Millington 
Miller  contributed  to  Collier's  for  July  1, 1905,  a  facsimile  of  what  purported 
to  be  a  portion  of  an  issue  of  the  Cape- Fear  Mercury  for  June  3,  1775,  an<^ 
alleged  that  he  had  found  the  original  among  papers  left  by  Andrew 
Stevenson.  This  paper  is  here  reproduced  from  a  plate  kindly  furnished 
by  the  Macmillan  Company  and  the  editor  of  the  American  Historical 
Review.  It  was  proved  to  be  spurious  by  the  friends  as  well  as  by  the 
opponents  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration.  The  evidence  is  fully  presented 
in  the  American  Historical  Review  for  April,  1906.  See  also  the  Columbia 
(S.  C.)  State,  July  30,  1905  ;  The  True  Mecklenburg  "  Declaration  of  In 
dependence,"  by  A.  S.  Salley,  Jr.  (Columbia  S.  C.,  1905) ;  the  Charlotte 
(N.  C.)  Daily  Observer,  Nov.  17,  1905,  Jan.  i,  12,  1906  ;  and  the  Souvenir 
Programme  of  the  celebration  of  the  I3ist  anniversary  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  (Charlotte,  N.  C.,  1906),  pp.  15-21. 


54          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

between  the  three  copies.1  Governor  Martin's  sec 
retary  took  little  pains  to  make  an  accurate  tran 
script  of  the  resolves,  as  is  shown  by  his  egregious 
errors,  and  the  Cape-Fear  Mercury  was  a  badly- 
printed  newspaper.2 

Since  only  three  inclosures,  two  of  which  are 
now  with  his  original  letter,  are  referred  to  by 
Governor  Martin  and  noted  in  the  indorsement ; 
since  he  mentions  only  one  newspaper,  and  only 
one  is  known  to  have  been  removed  from  the 
Public  Record  Office,  it  is  clear  that  this  newspaper 
contained  both  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  and  the 
reply  to  the  Governor's  proclamation  made  by  the 
committees  of  the  Wilmington  district  on  June 
21,  1775.  This  newspaper  was  either  the  Cape- 
Fear  Mercury  or  the  North-Carolina  Gazette  of 
June  23d  or  June  3Oth,  for  the  Mecklenburg  re 
solves  cannot  be  found  in  the  Virginia  Gazettes* 
and  the  reply  to  the  proclamation  did  not  appear 
in  the  Charleston  papers  until  the  first  week  in 
July.  The  North-Carolina  Gazette  may  be  elimi 
nated,  because  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  would 
hardly  have  been  printed  both  in  the  issue  of  June 

1  A  copy  of  this  document  from  the  original  in  the  possession  of  the  Earl 
of  Dartmouth  will  be  found  in  the  Appendix.     Transcripts  and  informa 
tion  concerning  manuscripts  in  the  Earl  of  Dartmouth's  collection  and  in 
the  Public  Record  Office  have  been  obtained  from  Messrs.  B.  F.  Stevens  & 
Brown,  of  London,  from  B.  F.  Stevens's   Calendar  of  the  MSS.  of  the 
Earl  of  Dartmouth  {Historical  MSS.  Commission,  i4th  Report,  Appendix, 
Part  X.),  and  from   the  Bancroft  transcripts  in   the  New  York  Public 
Library.  

2  Thomas:  History  of  Printing,  ii,  365. 

8  The  Virginia  Gazettes  were  examined  for  the  writer  by  the  courtesy  of 
Mr.  W.  G.  Stanard,  of  the  Va.  Hist.  Soc. 


The  Lost  " Cape-Fear  Mercury"        55 

1 6th  and  in  one  of  the  two  next  issues,  and  because 
Governor  Martin  was  almost  entirely  cut  off  from 
communication  with  New-Bern.  It  is  most  likely, 
moreover,  that  the  newspaper  which  Governor 
Martin  spoke  of  in  his  address  at  Fort  Johnston 
on  June  25th  was  not  the  North-Carolina  Gazette 
of  June  1 6th  or  the  South  Carolina  Gazette  ;  And 
Country  Journal  of  June  I3th,  neither  of  which 
contained  the  reply  to  his  proclamation,  but  the 
newspaper  which  he  inclosed  in  his  letter  of  June 
3Oth.  As  the  Mecklenburg  resolutions  are  known 
to  have  been  printed  in  the  Cape-Fear  Mercury, 
we  may  be  sure  that  it  was  done  one  week,  rather 
than  two  weeks,  after  they  appeared  in  the  New-Bern 
paper.  The  evidence  cited  to  show  that  the  Cape- 
Fear  Mercury  of  Friday,  June  23,  1775  (No.  261), 
contained  the  reply  of  the  Wilmington  committee 
to  the  Governor's  proclamation,  and  the  evidence 
that  the  newspaper  sent  in  Governor  Martin's 
letter  to  Lord  Dartmouth  could  have  been  no 
other,  is  conclusive. 

Governor  Martin's  subsequent  letters  and  public 
papers  show  that,  notwithstanding  attempts  to  pre 
vent  his  adherents  from  communicating  with  him, 
he  was  well  informed  of  movements  in  all  parts  of 
the  province,  but  never  heard  of  any  other  extraor 
dinary  manifesto'  of  Mecklenburg  County  than 
that  of  May  31,  1775.  If  writers  on  the  Meck 
lenburg  Declaration  had  quoted  all  his  statements 
relative  to  the  publication  of  the  committee  of 
Mecklenburg,  other  evidence  would  not  have  been 
necessary  to  identify  it. 


56          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Governor  Martin's  dispatch  of  June  3Oth  was 
not  sent  off  until  after  July  6th,  when  he  wrote 
again  to  Lord  Dartmouth,  (Dispatch  No.  35),  and 
said1  :  "  I  have  engaged  Mr.  Alex'r  Schawwhom  I 
now  have  the  honor  to  introduce  to  your  Lordship 
to  charge  himself  with  this  Letter  and  my  Dispatch 
No.  34."  Dispatch  No.  36,  dated  July  i6th,  con 
tains  accounts  received  from  Boston  "  since  the 
departure  of  Mr.  Schaw,"  it  reads,  "who  was 
charged  with  my  Dispatches  to  your  Lordship  No. 
34  and  35,  Duplicates  of  which  are  herewith  in 
closed."  2  The  manuscript  copy  of  the  Mecklenburg 
resolves  went  to  England,  therefore,  with  these 
latter  dispatches.  They  were  sent  off  onJuly2Oth 
with  a  letter  of  that  date  (No.  38)  and  another  written 
in  the  meantime,  by  a  passenger  in  a  merchant's 
ship,3  who  delivered  them  as  their  indorsements 
show,  on  September  10,  1775.  Lord  Dartmouth 
wrote  Governor  Martin,  September  15,  1775  :  "I 
have  received  from  the  hands  of  Mr.  Burgwine  your 
dispatches  numbered  34,  35,  36,  37,  and  38,  the  first 
two  being  duplicates,  the  originals  of  which  you 
mention  to  have  been  trusted  to  Mr.  Schaw,  who 
has  not  yet  appeared."  4 

Alexander  Schaw  arrived  in  England  in  October, 
J775«  The  sole  object  of  his  going  was  to  confer 
with  Lord  Dartmouth,  at  the  request  of  Governor 
Martin  and  the  president  of  the  Council,  upon  the 


^Col.Rec.  of  N.  C.,x.,  70. 
*Ibid.,  x.,  96. 
8  Ibid.,  x.,  98,  100,  108. 
4  Ibid.,  x.,  247. 


The  Lost  "  Cape-Fear  Mercury"        57 

plan  of  military  operations  intended  for  North 
Carolina,  which  resulted  in  the  battle  of  Moore's 
Creek  Bridge  in  February,  1776.  Governor  Martin 
was  to  take  personal  charge  of  these  operations, 
and  a  numerous  body  of  the  Scotch  Highlanders 
of  the  province  had  engaged  to  join  him.  Schaw 
stated  that  most  of  the  inhabitants  of  Wilmington 
were  well  affected.  His  long  letters  to  Lord  Dart 
mouth  contain  no  mention  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  of  Independence,  and  show  that  it 
would  certainly  have  been  brought  to  the  Gov 
ernor's  notice  if  it  was  ever  passed.1 

On  July  1 8,  1775,  a  meeting  of  the  Council  was 
held  on  board  the  sloop  of  war  Cruizer,  in  the 
Cape  Fear  River,  which  Governor  Martin  had 
found  to  be  a  safer  retreat  than  Fort  Johnston. 
The  Council  Journal  reads2: 

The  Governor  having  informed  the  Board  that  he  had 
received  advices  that  the  People  of  the  County  of  Bladen 
were  persuing  the  Example  of  the  People  of  Mecklenburg, 
whose  treasonable  proceedings  he  had  communicated  to  the 
Council  at  the  last  meeting  [June  25th]  desired  the  advice  of 
the  Council  on  the  measures  expedient  to  be  taken  to  counter 
act  such  unwarrantable  and  dangerous  extravagancies  and  to 
check  and  prevent  the  growth  of  that  spirit  of  disorder  which 
at  this  time  unhappily  prevails  in  a  great  part  of  the  Province 
and  especially  in  the  County  of  Mecklenburg  and  the  Counties 
on  the  Sea  Coasts,  particularly  evinced  by  the  meetings  which 
have  been  held  among  the  People  for  the  choice  of  Military 
Officers  by  which  they  have  usurped  the  undoubted  Pre 
rogative  of  the  Crown,  and  the  frequent  Assemblings  of  the 

1  Alexander  Schaw  to  Lord  Dartmouth,  October  31  and  November  8, 
1775  ;  Earl  of  Dartmouth's  MSS. 

2  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.t  x.,  106-107. 


58          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

People  in  Arms  by  the  invitation  of  officers  so  illegally  con 
stituted James  Hasell  [a  member  of  the  Council]  is 

of  opinion  that  his  Excellency  should  take  every  lawfull 
measure  in  his  power  to  suppress  the  unnatural  Rebellion 
now  fomenting  in  Mecklenburg  and  other  parts  of  the  Pro 
vince  in  order  to  overturn  the  Constitution  and  His  just 
prerogative. 

Governor  Martin  here  speaks  of  the  same 
"  treasonable  proceedings "  of  Mecklenburg  to 
which  he  had  called  the  attention  of  the  Council 
on  June  25th.  Neither  the  Governor  nor  the 
Council  had  any  idea  that  Mecklenburg  County 
formally  declared  independence  nearly  two  months 
before.  They  knew  that  Mecklenburg  had  de 
clared  the  constitution  of  the  colony  wholly  sus 
pended,  (which  the  Governor  loosely  called  an 
entire  dissolution  on  another  occasion,)  and  had 
usurped  the  royal  prerogative  by  electing  their 
own  civil  and  military  officers.  Bladen  County, 
which  followed  the  example  of  Mecklenburg, 
has  yet  to  set  up  a  claim  for  having  declared 
independence. 

On  the  i8th  of  August,  1775,  the  governor 
issued  a  long  and  "fiery"  proclamation  from  the 
Cruiser.1  He  states  that  he  has  seen  in  the  Cape- 
Fear  Mercury  the  reply  of  the  Wilmington  com 
mittee  to  his  proclamation  of  June  i6th,  which 
characterized  him,  he  says,  as  "  an  Enemy  to  the 
Interests  of  this  Province  in  particular  and  America 
in  General,"  and  that  he  has  "also  seen  a  most 
infamous  publication  in  the  Cape-Fear  Mercury 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C*.,  x.,  141-151. 


The  Lost  "  Cape-Fear  Mercury  "        59 

importing  to  be  resolves  of  a  set  of  people  stiling 
themselves  a  Committee  for  the  County  of  Meck 
lenburg  most  traitorously  declaring  the  entire  dis 
solution  of  the  Laws,  Government,  and  Constitution 
of  this  country,  and  setting  up  a  system  of  rule 
and  regulation  repugnant  to  the  Laws  and  sub 
versive  of  His  Majesty's  Government."  Governor 
Martin's  language  can  be  properly  applied  to  noth 
ing  less  than  a  declaration  of  independence,  but 
he  would  never  have  written  several  descriptions 
of  the  alleged  declaration  of  May  2Oth  in  which 
neither  the  words  "  independence  "  or  "  allegiance  " 
are  used.  The  paper  to  which  the  Governor  re 
fers,  moreover,  concerns  the  laws,  government,  and 
constitution  of  "  this  country,"  as  does  the  paper  of 
May  3ist,  while  the  supposititious  declaration  was 
only  a  county  affair.  The  Governor  mentions  pub 
lications  in  two  other  issues  of  the  Cape-Fear 
Mercury,  and  gives  the  dates ;  but  he  could  not 
give  the  date  of  the  publication  of  either  the  Meck 
lenburg  resolves  or  the  reply  to  his  proclamation. 
He  probably  sent  off  in  his  letter  of  June  3Oth  his 
only  copy  of  the  Cape-Fear  Mercury  of  June  23d, 
and  forgot  its  date.  Hence  the  duplicate  letter, 
enclosing  the  undated  manuscript  copy  of  the 
Mecklenburg  resolves,  did  not  contain  the  reply 
to  the  proclamation,  although  spoken  of  at  length 
in  the  letter. 

Governor  Martin's  last  reference  to  the  Meck 
lenburg  resolves  is  contained  in  his  dispatch  of 
August  28,  1775  (No.  39),  to  the  Earl  of  Dart- 


60          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

mouth.1  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  manu 
script  copy  of  the  resolves  was  sent  on  July  2oth 
with  a  dispatch  of  that  date  (No.  38)  and  earlier 
ones.  The  Governor  writes  that  loyal  subjects  in 
the  interior  have  been  prevented  from  communi 
cating  with  him. 

All  of  them  [he  says]  who  have  come  down  here  to  consult 
me  about  their  safety,  have  been  intercepted  coming  or  going, 
and  searched,  detained,  abused,  and  stript  of  any  Papers  they 
have  had  about  them  except  a  Messenger  from  a  considerable 
Body  of  Germans,  settled  in  the  County  of  Mecklenburg,  who 
brought  me  a  loyal  declaration  against  the  Very  extraordinary 
and  traitorous  resolves  of  the  Committee  of  that  County,  of 
which  I  had  the  honor  to  transmit  a  copy  to  your  Lordship 
with  my  last  Dispatches. 

Here  we  have  a  direct  reference  by  Governor 
Martin  to  the  manuscript  in  his  duplicate  dispatch 
of  June  30,  1775,  thus  identifying  with  absolute 
certainty  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  that  he  spoke 
of  in  his  letters,  his  addresses  to  the  Council,  and 
his  proclamation.  We  have  also  the  strongest  evi 
dence  that  the  May  3ist  resolves  were  not  pre 
ceded  by  a  declaration  of  independence,  for  the 
Tories  of  Mecklenburg  would  not  have  drawn  up  a 
protest  against  them,  rather  than  against  the  de 
claration  of  eleven  days  earlier,  in  order  to  show 
their  loyalty.  The  messenger  from  Mecklenburg 
told  Governor  Martin  nothing  about  the  earlier 
declaration.  The  only  conclusion  consistent  with 
historical  probability  is  that  the  paper  remembered 
in  Mecklenburg  as  a  declaration  of  independence, 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.,  x.,  230-237. 


The  Lost  " Cape-Fear  Mercury"        61 

as  having  been  proclaimed  before  assembled  thou 
sands  at  Charlotte  in  May,  1775,  and  as  having 
been  widely  known  in  the  western  part  of  North 
Carolina,  where  Governor  Martin's  adherents  were 
most  numerous,  was  the  paper  of  May  31,  1775, 
which  the  Governor,  ignorant  of  an  earlier  mani 
festo  of  a  like  import,  virtually  called  a  declaration 
of  independence,  and  denounced  as  the  most  ex 
traordinary  of  "all  the  horrid  and  treasonable 
publications  that  the  inflammatory  spirits  of  this 
Continent  have  yet  produced." 

The  May  3ist  resolves  were  also  dispatched  to 
England  by  the  royal  Governor  James  Wright,  of 
Georgia,  who  regarded  them  in  much  the  same 
light  as  did  Governor  Martin.  In  a  letter  to  the 
Earl  of  Dartmouth,  written  at  Savannah,  June  20, 
1775,  in  which  he  enclosed  a  copy  of  the  South- 
Carolina  Gazette;  And  Country  Journal,  of  June 
J3>  J775>  Gov.  Wright  said:  "  By  the  inclosed 
Paper  your  Lordship  will  see  the  extraordinary 
Resolves  of  the  People  in  Charlotte  Town  Meck 
lenburg  County ;  and  I  should  not  be  surprized  if 
the  same  should  be  done  every  where  else."1 

Similar  expressions  from  two  men  who  stood  high 
in  the  ranks  of  North  Carolina  patriots  are  con 
firmatory.  On  June  18,  1775,  Richard  Cogdell, 
chairman  of  the  committee  at  New-Bern,  transmitted 
to  Richard  Caswell,  then  in  attendance  on  the  Con- 

1  Transcript  in  the  Bancroft  Collection,  N.  Y.  Pub.  Lib.  Bancroft  noted  : 
"  This  last  Paragraph  is  in  Wright's  own  hand  writing  :  the  former  part  of 
the  letter  being  written  by  a  secretary  or  clerk."  Bancroft  found  the  letter 
and  newspaper  in  London  in  1847,  where  they  are  still  preserved  in  the 
Public  Record  Office. 


62          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

tinental  Congress,  the  copy  of  the  North-Carolina 
Gazette  published  in  New-Bern  on  the  1 6th  of  the 
month,  which  was  recently  unearthed.  He  wrote: 
"  you  '1  observe  the  Mecklinburg  resolves  exceeds 
all  other  Committees  or  the  Congress  itself.  I  send 
you  the  paper  wherein  they  are  inserted. "  Cog- 
dell  had  heard  of  no  action  of  Mecklenburg  county 
approaching  a  declaration  of  independence  but 
that  of  May  3ist.  On  the2;th  of  June  Samuel 
Johnston,  who  served  as  president  of  the  Provincial 
Congress  two  months  later,  wrote  Joseph  Hewes, 
another  North  Carolina  delegate  at  Philadelphia  : 
"  Tom  Polk,  too,  is  raising  a  very  pretty  spirit  in 
the  back  country  (see  the  newspapers).  He  has 
gone  a  little  farther  than  I  would  choose  to  have 
gone,  but  perhaps  no  further  than  was  necessary.  "  * 

1  See  Appendix. 


CHAPTER   V 

CAPTAIN    JACK'S    MISSION    TO    PHILADELPHIA 

THE  most  important  circumstance  mentioned  by 
Governor  Martin  in  connection  with  the  Meck 
lenburg  resolves  of  May  31,  1775,  stands  out 
prominently  in  the  reminiscences  of  John  McKnitt 
Alexander,  as  being  associated  with  the  declaration 
of  independence  of  which  he  is  sponsor.  Governor 
Martin  wrote  Lord  Dartmouth  on  June  30,  1775, 
with  reference  to  the  May  3ist  resolves  :  "  A  copy 
of  these  Resolves  I  am  informed  were  sent  off  by 
express  to  the  Congress  at  Philadelphia  as  soon  as 
they  were  passed  in  the  Committee."  On  the  other 
hand,  John  McKnitt  Alexander  states  that  the 
paper  of  May  2Oth  was  sent  by  express  to  the 
Continental  Congress,  and  nearly  all  who  were 
called  upon  to  corroborate  his  statements  testified 
that  the  declaration  of  independence  which  they 
recollected  to  have  heard  read  in  Charlotte  on  that 
date,  or  about  that  date,  was  so  dispatched. 
Neither  Governor  Martin,  nor  John  McKnitt 
Alexander,  nor  the  witnesses  to  the  meeting  at 
Charlotte  in  May,  1775,  say  that  two  series  of 

63 


64          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

resolutions,  adopted  eleven  days  apart,  were  sent ; 
and  it  is  admitted  on  all  hands  that  only  one  man 
rode  express  from  Charlotte  to  Philadelphia  as 
bearer  of  resolves  adopted  in  that  month.  Here 
we  have  most  striking  proof  that  the  story  of 
the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Independence  be 
longs  to  the  May  3ist  resolves. 

Captain  James  Jack,  whom  the  aged  witnesses 
named  as  the  bearer  of  the  declaration  of  inde 
pendence,  was  solicited  in  1819  to  state  what  he 
knew  of  the  matter.  Captain  Jack  was  then  in  his 
eighty-eighth  year.  He  could  not  say  with  cer 
tainty  when  the  declaration  was  adopted,  but  had 
recently  seen  newspaper  articles  on  the  subject. 
He  wrote  as  follows  : 

When  the  resolutions  were  finally  agreed  on,  they  were  pub 
licly  proclaimed  from  the  court-house  door  in  the  town  of 
Charlotte,  and  received  with  every  demonstration  of  joy  by 
the  inhabitants. 

I  was  then  solicited  to  be  the  bearer  of  the  proceedings  to 
Congress.  I  set  out  the  following  month,  say  June,  and  in 
passing  through  Salisbury,  the  General  Court  was  sitting — at 
the  request  of  the  court  I  handed  a  copy  of  the  resolutions  to 
Col.  Kennon,  an  Attorney,  and  they  were  read  aloud  in  open 
court.  Major  William  Davidson,  and  Mr.  Avery,  an  attorney, 
called  on  me  at  my  lodgings  the  evening  after,  and  observed, 
that  they  heard  of  but  one  person,  (a  Mr.  Beard)  but  approved 
of  them. 

I  then  proceeded  on  to  Philadelphia,  and  delivered  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Independence  of  May,  1775,  to 
Richard  Caswell  and  William  Hooper,  the  Delegates  to  Con 
gress  from  the  State  of  North-Carolina. 

Capt.  Jack  recalled  but  one  series  of  resolutions. 
He  states  in  one  place  that  he  bore  the  "  pro- 


Captain  Jack's  Mission  to  Philadelphia  65 

ceedings  "  to  Congress,  but  they  were  the  proceed 
ings  of  only  one  meeting.  From  the  circumstances 
attending  his  journey  to  Philadelphia  it  will  be 
seen  that  he  could  not  possibly  have  carried  a 
declaration  of  independence  of  the  2oth  of  May, 
1775.  All  contemporary  testimony  points  to  the 
paper  of  May  3ist. 

The  only  court  held  at  Salisbury  for  a  month  or 
more  after  May  20,  1775,  was  a  court  of  oyer  and 
terminer  for  the  Salisbury  district,  comprising 
Mecklenburg,  Rowan,  and  four  neighboring  coun 
ties,  which  sat  from  June  ist  to  June  6th,  1775. 
This  was  the  "  General  Court "  which  was  in  ses 
sion  when  Captain  Jack  passed  through  Salisbury.1 
Salisbury  was  the  county  seat  of  Rowan,  adjoining 
Mecklenburg,  and  forty  miles  from  Charlotte.  The 
significance  of  the  fact  that  Captain  Jack  left  Char 
lotte  after  May  31,  1775,  and  within  six  days  after, 
is  palpable  when  we  consider  that  Governor  Martin 
was  informed  that  the  May  3ist  resolves  were 
sent  to  Philadelphia  as  soon  as  they  were  passed, 
that  the  witnesses  state  that  the  resolves  which 
they  had  in  mind  were  sent  off  a  few  days  after 
their  adoption,  and  that  no  one  tells  us  that  Captain 
Jack,  an  "  express,"  tarried  two  weeks  in  Charlotte 
before  starting  on  his  mission. 

The  papers  carried  by  Captain  Jack  were  of  such 
a  nature  that  when  publicly  read  in  court  at  Salis 
bury  during  the  first  week  in  June,  a  court  held 
under  the  King's  commission  by  men  who  took  the 

1  The  minutes  of  the  court  are  printed  in  the  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  (7.,  x.,  1-9. 
Cf.  Adam  Brevard's  narrative  in  Wheeler's  Reminiscences  of  N.  C.t  242. 


66          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

oath,  at  the  opening  of  court,  for  the  qualification 
of  crown  officers,1  they  met  with  unanimous  ap 
proval  ;  of  such  a  nature  that,  notwithstanding  its 
approval,  the  court  continued  to  administer  justice 
in  the  King's  name  ;  of  such  a  nature  that  at  a  later 
date  staunch  Whigs  of  Salisbury  could  conscien 
tiously  take  the  oath  for  the  qualification  of  public 
officers  and  hold  other  courts  there  under  the 
King's  commission 2 ;  of  such  a  nature,  in  fine,  that 
a  large  number  of  jurors  who  heard  and  approved 
them  could  sincerely  profess  their  ardent  desire  for 
reconciliation  with  Great  Britain  a  few  weeks  later 
as  members  of  committees  of  safety  in  neighboring 
counties.3  Here  may  be  found  a  small  part  of  the 
"  accumulation  of  miracles,"  as  John  Adams  ex 
pressed  it,  which  those  who  contend  that  Captain 
Jack  bore  a  declaration  of  independence  when  he 
passed  through  Salisbury  have  never  attempted  to 
explain  away. 

The  time  of  Captain  Jack's  arrival  in  Philadelphia 
is  ascertained  from  a  joint  certificate  given  in  1830 
by  Alphonso  Alexander,  Amos  Alexander,  and 
Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander,  who  state  that 
they 

frequently  heard  William  S.  Alexander,  dec'd,  say  that  he, 
the  said  Wm.  S.  Alexander,  was  at  Philadelphia  on  mercantile 
business  in  the  early  part  of  the  summer  of  1775,  say  in  June  ; 
and  that  on  the  day  that  Gen.  Washington  left  Philadelphia 
to  take  command  of  the  Northern  army,  he,  the  said  Wm.  S. 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  £,x.,  I. 

'/to/.,  x.f  139.435 

8  Ibid.,  x.,  163,  228-229,  296-298,  etc. 


Captain  Jack's  Mission  to  Philadelphia  67 

Alexander,  met  with  Capt.  James  Jack,  who  informed  him, 
the  said  William  S.  Alexander,  that  he,  the  said  James  Jack, 
was  there  as  the  agent  or  bearer  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde 
pendence  made  in  Charlotte  on  the  twentieth  day  of  May, 
seventeen  hundred  and  seventy-five,  by  the  citizens  of  Meck 
lenburg,  then  including  Cabarrus,  with  instructions  to  present 
the  same  to  the  Delegates  from  North  Carolina,  and  by  them 
to  be  laid  before  Congress,  and  which  he  said  he  had  done. 

General  Washington  left  Philadelphia  to  take 
command  of  the  army  before  Boston  on  Friday, 
June  23,  1775.'  The  papers  that  Captain  Jack  de 
livered  on  that  day,  or  shortly  before,  to  Caswell, 
Hooper,  and  Hewes,  the  North  Carolina  delegates 
in  the  Continental  Congress,  then  in  session,  are 
not  mentioned  in  the  journal  of  that  body,  because 
of  their  character,  or  because,  it  is  said,  they  were 
not  formally  laid  before  it.  Charles  Thomson,  the 
secretary,  had  not  yet  perfected  his  method  of 
noting  papers  and  reports  coming  to  the  Congress.  * 

Captain  Jack  found  the  Continental  Congress 
aiming  to  act  as  dutiful  subjects  contending  for  their 
political  rights,  avowing  that  in  taking  up  arms  the 
colonies  had  no  wish  to  dissolve  the  connection 
which  had  so  long  and  happily  subsisted,  they  said,3 
with  Great  Britain,  and  sedulously  and  honestly 
pursuing  a  policy  of  reconciliation.  The  Congress 
expressed  the  feelings  of  Americans  generally.  In 
1776,  Washington  wrote  :  "  When  I  took  command 
of  the  army,  I  abhorred  the  idea  of  independence." 

1  Pennsylvania  Gazette  June  28,  1775,  and  Rivingtorfs  New  York 
Gazetteer^  June  29,  1775. 

5  Worthington  C.  Ford,  in  The  Nation,  Ixxxii,  475. 

3  Journals  of  the  Continental  Congress •,  ii.  (Ford  ed.),  135, 138.  Declaration 
on  taking  up  arms. 


68  The  Meckenburg  Declaration 

It  may  be  safely  said  that  not  one  member  of 
the  Continental  Congress  would  have  approved 
a  declaration  of  independence  by  Mecklenburg 
County.  The  few  ardent  spirits  among  its  mem 
bers  who  favored  independence,  but  dared  not  as 
yet  to  openly  advocate  it,  would  have  deplored  the 
hasty  action  of  Mecklenburg  as  a  premature  step 
towards  independence  which  would  invoke  division 
and  ruin.  But  John  McKnitt  Alexander,  the  cus 
todian  of  the  original  records  of  the  Mecklenburg 
committee,  tells  us  that  on  the  return  of  Captain 
Jack  the  committee  "  learned  that  their  proceed 
ings  were  individually  approved  by  the  Members 
of  Congress  [evidently  the  North  Carolina  mem 
bers],  but  it  was  deemed  premature  to  lay  them 
before  the  House.  A  joint  letter  from  said  three 
members  of  Congress  was  also  received,  com 
plimentary  of  the  zeal  in  the  common  cause,  and 
recommending  perseverance,  order  and  energy." 
It  appears  from  the  statements  of  others  who  were 
present  in  Charlotte  at  that  time  that  Captain  Jack 
returned  answers  "  both  from  the  President  and  our 
Delegates  in  Congress,  expressive  of  their  entire 
approbation  of  the  course  that  had  been  adopted, 
recommending  a  continuance  in  the  same ;  and 
that  the  time  would  soon  be,  when  the  whole  Con 
tinent  would  follow  our  example."  Rev.  Francis 
Cummins,  whose  testimony  is  valuable  because  he 
did  not  refresh  his  memory  by  a  sight  of  the  Alex 
ander  narrative,  states  that  Captain  Jack  "brought 
back  to  the  county  the  thanks  of  Congress  for 
their  zeal,  and  the  advice  of  Congress  to  be  a  little 


Captain  Jack's  Mission  to  Philadelphia  69 

more  patient  until   Congress  should  take  the  mea 
sures  thought  to  be  best." 

These  messages  to  Mecklenburg  are  in  keeping 
only  with  the  May  3ist  resolves.  In  private  let 
ters  and  in  public  papers  Hooper,  Hewes,  and  Cas- 
well  expressed  their  ardent  desire  for  reconciliation 
in  terms  which  show  plainly  that  they  neither  saw 
nor  approved  a  declaration  of  independence  by 
Mecklenburg  county.  Joseph  Hewes  wrote  from 
Philadelphia  on  July  8,  I775,1  to  his  friend  James 
Iredell  in  North  Carolina,  that  the  British  ministry 
"  charge  us  with  rebellion  because  we  will  not  be 
lieve  that  they  have  a  right  to  make  laws  to  bind 
us  in  all  cases  whatsoever.  Strange  that  we  should 
be  deemed  rebels  for  an  article  of  faith, — after  all 
this,  they  add  insult  to  injury  and  tell  us  we  are  all 
poltroons  and  cowards."  Hewes  would  no  doubt 
have  thought  it  far  stranger  if  the  injurious  charge 
of  rebellion  was  made  on  the  ground  that  a  large 
number  of  his  constituents  had  formally  declared 
independence  of  Great  Britain,  a  proceeding  which 
is  said  to  have  elicited  his  commendation  about 
two  weeks  before  the  date  of  this  letter.  William 
Hooper  wrote  Iredell  from  Philadelphia  on  Jan. 
uary  6,  I7762:  "  Yes,  Britain,  it  is  the  criterion 
of  thy  existence  ;  thy  greatness  totters.  Luxury 

1  McRee's  Life  and  Correspondence  of  James  Iredell^  i.,  258. 

*  Ibid.,  i.,  269.  Compare  this  with  Hooper's  letter  of  April  26,  1774, 
as  printed  in  Jones's  Defence  of  JV.  C.,  312-315,  in  which  he  says  that  the 
colonies  "  are  striding  fast  to  independence,  and  ere  long  will  build  an 
empire  upon  the  ruin  of  Great  Britain  ;  will  adopt  its  constitution  purged  of 
its  impurities,"  etc.  His  meaning,  it  appears  from  his  subsequent  letter, 
was  that  '*  America  must  become  the  seat  of  empire,"  and  that  Britain  should 
44  sink  away  in  the  arms  of  American  sons." 


70          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

and  wealth,  with  every  vice  in  their  train,  are 
hurrying  thee  down  the  precipice,  and  liberty, 
shuddering  at  thy  fate,  in  seeking  an  asylum 
westward.  Oh,  heaven  !  still  check  her  approach 
ing  ruin  ;  restore  her  to  the  affection  of  her  Ameri 
can  subjects.  May  she  long  flourish  the  guardian 
of  freedom, ..."  In  the  Provincial  Congress  which 
met  at  Hillsboro  on  August  20,  1775,  Hooper  drew 
up  an  address  to  the  inhabitants  of  Great  Britain  in 
which  he  said1:  "  We  have  been  told  that  Independ 
ence  is  our  object ;  that  we  seek  to  shake  off  all 
connection  with  the  parent  State.  Cruel  sugges 
tion  !  Do  not  all  our  professions,  all  our  actions, 
uniformly  contradict  this  ?  "  Is  it  not  "  cruel,"  then, 
to  suggest  that  Mecklenburg  county  shook  off  all 
political  connection  with  the  parent  State  a  few 
months  before  ?  In  reply  to  a  vote  of  thanks 
by  the  same  Provincial  Congress  for  their  pa 
triotic  and  faithful  discharge  of  the  trust  reposed  in 
them  as  delegates  to  the  Continental  Congress, 
Hooper,  Caswell,  and  Hewes  declared  that  they 
had  acted  with  "  hearts  warmed  with  a  Zealous 
love  of  Liberty,  and  desirous  of  reconciliation  with 
the  parent  State  upon  Terms  just  and  Constitu 
tional."  2  Richard  Caswell  wrote  a  circular  letter  to 
the  town  and  county  committees  of  North  Caro 
lina,  dated  June  19,  1775,  and  signed  by  himself 
and  his  two  colleagues,  in  which  he  urged  his  con 
stituents  to  form  themselves  into  militia  companies 
and  to  be  in  readiness  to  resist  force  by  force.  He 

i  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.,  x.,  202  ;  AT.  C.  Booklet,  July,  1905,  v.,  54. 
3  Col.  Rec.  ofN.  C,  x.,  189. 


Captain  Jack's  Mission  to  Philadelphia  71 

said  in  conclusion  :  "  look  to  the  reigning  monarch 
of  Britain  as  your  rightful  and  lawful  sovereign  ; 
dare  every  danger  and  difficulty  in  support  of  his 
person,  crown,  and  dignity,  and  consider  every  man 
as  a  Traitor  to  his  King  who  infringing  the  Rights 
of  his  American  Subjects  attempts  to  invade  those 
glorious  Revolution  principles  which  placed  him  on 
the  Throne  and  must  preserve  him  there."  *  Dur 
ing  the  last  week  in  June,  1775,  Caswell  sent  copies 
of  this  letter  to  the  New-Bern  Committee  of  Safety 
for  distribution  in  the  eastern  counties  of  North 
Carolina,  but  copies  for  the  western  counties  were 
sent  during  the  same  week  "  by  a  man,"  said  a  mem 
ber  of  the  New-Bern  committee,  "  who  was  going 
from  Philadelphia  to  Mecklenburg  county  "  2 — in 
all  probability  Captain  Jack.  What  advice  to  men 
who  had  absolved  themselves  from  all  allegiance  to 
the  British  crown,  from  men  who  approved  their 
conduct ! 

If  Captain  Jack  delivered  a  declaration  of  inde 
pendence  to  Hooper,  Hewes,  and  Caswell,  it  is  most 
improbable  that  they  would  or  could  have  con 
cealed  the  fact  during  the  entire  period  of  their 
careers  in  Congress.  Caswell  served  until  July, 
1775,  Hooper,  though  absent  during  the  debates  on 
independence,  until  1777,  and  Hewes  until  Sep 
tember,  1776,  and  in  1779.  Captain  Jack,  more 
over,  was  under  no  injunction  of  secrecy.  His  papers 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.,  x.,  23.     Hewes  wrote  July  8,  1775,    that  Caswell 
drafted  the  circular  letter — ibid.,  x.,  85. 

2  Ibid,  x.,  65,  66,  85,     The  arrival  of  the  messenger  at  Salem,  N.  C.,  on 
July  7th,  is  recorded  in  a  historical  sketch  written  in  1783  by  an  eye  witness 
and  now  among  the  archives  of  the  Moravian  church  at  Bethania,  N.  C. 
See  the  Wachovia  Moravian  (Winston-Salem,  N.  C.),  October,  1906. 


72          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

were  publicly  read  at  Salisbury,  and  he  no  doubt 
revealed  their  nature  to  more  than  one  man  in 
Philadelphia  besides  William  S.  Alexander.  The 
silence  of  the  North  Carolina  delegates  was  enough 
to  convince  the  "Colossus  of  Independence,"  John 
Adams,  that  the  Mecklenburg  resolutions  of  May 
20,  1775,  were  spurious.  Adams  wrote  a  few 
months  after  their  first  publication  in  1819 J:  "I  was 
on  social,  friendly  terms  with  Caswell,  Hooper, 
and  Hewes,  every  moment  of  their  existence  in 
Congress ;  with  Hooper,  a  Bostonian,  and  a  son  of 
Harvard,  intimate  and  familiar.  Yet  from  neither 
of  the  three  did  the  slightest  hint  of  these  Mecklen 
burg  resolutions  ever  escape.  Is  it  possible  that  such 
resolutions  should  have  escaped  the  vigilant  atten 
tion  of  the  scrutinizing,  penetrating  minds  of  Patrick 
Henry,  R.  H.  Lee,  Mr.  Jefferson,  Mr.  Gadsden, 
Mr.  Rutledge,  Mr.  Jay,  Mr.  Sherman,  Mr.  Samuel 
Adams  ?  Hand  credo.  I  cannot  believe  that  they 
were  known  to  one  member  of  Congress  on  the  4th 
of  July,  1 776."  Adams  said  that  he  would  "  as  easily 
believe  that  a  flaming  Brand  might  be  thrust  into  a 
magazine  of  Powder  without  producing  an  Explo 
sion  as  that  those  Resolutions  could  have  passed 
in  1 775  [and]  had  not  been  known  to  any  Member  of 
Congress  in  i*j>]6."2  "Armed  with  this  bold  exam 
ple,"  wrote  Jefferson  to  Adams,3  "would  not  you  have 
addressed  our  timid  brethren  in  peals  of  thunder 
on  their  tardy  fears  ?  Would  not  every  advocate  of 

i  Adams  to  William  Bentley,  August  21,  1819,  Works^  x.,  383. 

9  Adams  to  Jefferson,  July  28,  1819,  Jefferson  MSS. 

'  Jefferson  to  Adams,  July  9,  1819,  Writings  (Ford  ed.),  x,  136-139. 


Captain  Jack's  Mission  to  Philadelphia  73 

independence  have  rung  the  glories  of  Mecklenburg 
county,  in  North  Carolina,  in  the  ears  of  the  doubt 
ing  Dickinson  and  others,  who  hung  so  heavily  on 
us  ?  Yet  the  example  of  independent  Mecklenburg 
county,  in  North  Carolina,  was  never  once  quoted." 
Up  to  this  point  we  have  found  that  nearly  every 
known  circumstance  attending  Captain  Jack's  jour 
ney  from  Charlotte  to  Philadelphia,  the  statements 
of  the  North  Carolina  delegates  in  the  Continental 
Congress,  and  the  testimony  of  Adams  and  Jefferson, 
are  inconsistent  with  the  hypothesis  that  Captain 
Jack  carried  a  declaration  of  independence,  and 
that  the  proofs  relied  on  to  support  that  hypothesis, 
considered  in  the  light  of  contemporaneous  testi 
mony,  point  to  the  paper  of  May  3ist  as  the  "dec 
laration  of  independence"  which  he  carried.  Add 
ing  to  this  the  direct  contemporaneous  testimony  of 
Governor  Martin  that  the  May  3ist  resolves  were 
sent  to  Philadelphia,  we  may  conclude  from  these 
facts  alone  that  Captain  Jack  carried  those  resolves 
and  not  the  supposititious  document  of  May  2oth. 
The  message  of  the  North  Carolina  delegates  to  the 
people  of  Mecklenburg  county,  complimenting  them 
upon  their  zeal  in  the  common  cause,  but  saying 
that  their  resolves  were  premature  to  be  laid  before 
Congress,  and  advising  them,  as  Francis  Cummins 
says,  to  be  a  little  more  patient  until  Congress  should 
take  the  measures  thought  to  be  best,  thus  becomes 
entirely  in  keeping  with  their  known  political 
sentiments  and  with  the  political  situation  of  the 
American  colonies  in  the  summer  of  1775.  The 
"  prematureness  "  of  the  May  3  ist  resolves  and  their 


74          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

important  relation  to  the  problem  of  providing  a 
temporary  substitute  for  the  lost  authority  of  civil 
government  during  the  dispute  with  Great  Britain, 
a  problem  which  engaged  the  thoughts  of  men  in 
many  parts  of  America,  have  been  overlooked  or 
underestimated.  In  every  colony  the  forms  of  the 
prostrate  old  government  were  respected;  its  officers 
were  recognized  in  their  official  capacity  and  per 
mitted  to  exercise  more  or  less  of  their  authority. 
By  openly  approving  the  May  3ist  resolves,  the 
Continental  Congress  was  asked  to  declare  that  un 
der  its  direction  the  Provincial  Congress  of  each 
colony  should  assume  the  powers  of  government,  and 
that  until  "  the  legislative  body  of  Great  Britain  re 
sign  its  unjust  and  arbitrary  pretentions  with  re 
spect  to  America  "  no  other  legislative  or  executive 
power  did  or  could  exist  in  any  of  the  colonies. 
Such  a  step  in  June,  1775,  would  have  driven  many 
a  sturdy  patriot  from  the  Continental  Congress. 
The  Suffolk  resolves,  approved  in  September, 
1 774,  averred  only  that  obedience  should  be  refused 
to  specified  oppressive  and  unconstitutional  acts 
of  Parliament  and  to  officials  appointed  by  or 
holding  their  places  under  those  acts  or  other 
wise  contrary  to  the  directions  of  the  charter 
and  laws  of  Massachusetts. 1  The  case  of  Massa 
chusetts  was  a  special  one,  growing  out  of  acts 
of  Parliament  altering  the  charter  and  laws  of 
the  province.  And  yet  the  friends  of  the  Meck 
lenburg  Declaration,  claiming  for  that  document 
the  pre-eminence  assigned  to  the  May  3ist  resolves 

1  Journals  of  the  Cont.  Cong.  (Forded.),  i.,  32-37. 


Captain  Jack's  Mission  to  Philadelphia  75 

by  the  horrified  Governor  of  North  Carolina,  and 
seemingly  unaware  that  these  resolves  are  probably 
more  strongly  indicative  of  a  conscious  striving  for 
independence  than  any  others  of  their  date,  and 
that  they  presented  for  consideration  to  the  Conti 
nental  Congress  a  question  which  no  other  body  of 
men  on  the  continent  was  competent  to  decide, 
argue  that  if  no  other  resolves  were  adopted  in 
Mecklenburg  county  in  May,  1775,  "  there  would 
have  been  no  reason  for  transmitting  copies  post 
haste  to  the  Continental  Congress,  nor  would  the 
Thirty-first  Resolves,  with  their  comparatively 
tame  resolutions,  have  elicited  from  the  President 
of  Congress  and  the  North  Carolina  delegates  to 
Congress  the  comments  ascribed  to  them.  "* 

A  few  weeks  before  the  arrival  of  Captain  Jack 
in  Philadelphia  (June  2,  1775),  the  Continental 
Congress  was  called  upon  to  face  the  very  issue 
that  was  brought  up  by  the  May  3ist  resolves  by 
replying  to  an  application  of  the  Provincial  Con 
gress  of  Massachusetts  for  "  most  explicit  advice  re 
specting  the  taking  up  and  exercising  the  powers  of 
civil  government."  The  patriots  of  Massachusetts 
stated  that  they  were  denied  the  exercise  of  civil 
government  according  to  their  charter,  that  they  had 
declined,  though  urged  by  the  most  pressing  ne 
cessity,  to  take  up  the  reins  of  civil  government,  as 
the  question  equally  affected  the  other  colonies,  and 
that  they  were  ready  to  submit  to  such  a  general 
plan  as  Congress  might  propose  to  all,  or  would  study 
to  form  such  a  government  as  would  promote  not 

1  North  American  Review,  July,  1905,  50. 


76          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

only  their  own  advantage,  but  the  union  and  inter 
est  of  all  America.1  The  Continental  Congress 
decided  this  case  on  its  special  circumstances,  avoid 
ing  any  recommendation  that  might  be  construed 
to  suggest  that  colonies  abrogate  authority  under 
the  crown,  and  advised  Massachusetts  to  proceed  un 
der  the  charter  and  choose  councillors  to  "  exercise 
the  powers  of  Government,  until  a  Governor,  of  his 
Majesty's  appointment,  will  consent  to  govern  the 
colony  according  to  its  charter." 2  Four  months 
later  (October  18,  1775),  New  Hampshire,  which 
had  no  charter  to  fall  back  upon,  and  suffered  from 
the  absence  of  authority,  asked  advice  respecting 
the  administration  of  justice  and  the  regulation  of 
"  civil  police."  3  The  Congress  hesitated.  Another 
request  of  this  nature  came  from  the  proprietors  of 
Transylvania,  who  had  purchased  their  lands  in 
what  is  now  Tennessee  and  Kentucky  from  the 
Cherokee  Indians ;  set  up  a  government  for  them 
selves,  acknowledging,  however,  "  their  allegiance 
to  their  Sovereign,  whose  constitutional  rights  and 
pre-eminence,"  they  said,  "  they  will  support  at  the 
risk  of  their  lives " ;  and  sent  an  agent  to  Phila 
delphia  with  a  memorial  asking  that  he  be  admitted 
to  a  seat  in  the  Continental  Congress  as  a  delegate 
from  the  new  colony.  The  agent,  James  Hogg, 
arrived  in  Philadelphia  October  22,  1775,  and  two 
days  later  had  an  interview  with  Samuel  and  John 
Adams.  Although  no  members  of  the  Congress 


»  Journals  of  the  Cent.  Cong.,  ii.,  76-78. 

*  Ibid.,  ii.,  83-84.  '  Ibid.,  iii.,  298. 


Captain  Jack's  Mission  to  Philadelphia  77 

were  more  decided  on  the  question  of  independence, 
the  Adamses  told  Hogg  :  "  We  have  petitioned  and 
addressed  the  King,  and  have  entreated  him  to  point 
out  some  mode  of  accommodation.  There  seems  to 
be  an  impropriety  in  embarrassing  our  reconciliation 
with  anything  new  ;  and  the  taking  under  our  pro 
tection  of  a  body  of  people  who  have  acted  in  defi 
ance  of  the  King's  proclamations,  will  be  looked  on 
as  a  confirmation  of  that  independent  spirit  with 
which  we  are  daily  reproached."  1 

While  the  application  of  New  Hampshire  was 
under  consideration,  news  of  the  King's  procla 
mation  of  August  23,  1775,  for  suppressing  rebel 
lion  and  sedition,  and  his  contemptuous  refusal  of 
the  second  petition  of  the  Continental  Congress, 
reached  Philadelphia.  On  November  3d,  three  days 
after  the  receipt  of  this  intelligence  and  one  week 
after  the  application  of  New  Hampshire  was  re 
ferred  to  a  committee,  it  was  recommended  that  the 
Provincial  Congress  of  New  Hampshire  "call  a  full 
and  free  representation  of  the  people,  and  establish 
such  a  form  of  goverment,  as,  in  their  judgment,  will 
best  produce  the  happiness  of  the  people,  and  most 
effectually  secure  peace  and  good  order  in  the  pro 
vince  during  the  continuance  of  the  present  dispute 
between  G[reat]  Britain  and  the  colonies."  On  the 
next  day,  the  Congress  gave  the  same  advice  to 
South  Carolina,  and  one  month  later  to  Virginia. 
Not  until  the  receipt  of  the  news  which,  in  the 
words  of  Bancroft,  caused  "  the  daybreak  of  the 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.t  x.,  258,  373.    John  Adams:    Works,  ii.,  430. 


78          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Revolution,"  did  the  popular  leaders  resolve  to  aim 
at  independence,  and  the  Continental  Congress 
take  the  step  suggested  by  Mecklenburg,  which  was 
now  regarded  by  all  as  the  first  step  toward  inde 
pendence.1  "During  the  course  of  my  Life,  and  un 
til  after  the  second  Petition  of  Congress  (in  1775)," 
wrote  John  Jay,  one  of  its  members,  in  1821,  "I 
never  did  hear  any  American,  of  any  class,  or  of  any 
Description,  express  a  wish  for  the  Independence 
of  the  colonies."  2 

Not  only  were  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  of  May 
31,  1775,  far  in  advance  of  political  sentiment  in  the 
colonies,  and  therefore  not  to  be  approved,  but  the 
policy  pursued  by  the  Continental  Congress  in 
June,  1775,  suggested  the  propriety  of  giving  them 
as  little  publicity  as  possible.  When  Captain  Jack 
arrived  in  Philadelphia  the  second  petition  to  the 
King,  the  "  Olive  Branch,"  was  being  prepared. 
This  petition  expressed  a  sincere  attachment  to  the 
person,  family,  and  government  of  the  King,  and  a 
desire  for  reconciliation.3  "  Our  Enemies  charge 
us  with  Sedition,"  said  the  address  to  the  inhabit 
ants  of  Great  Britain,  adopted  July  8,  1775.*  "In 
what  does  it  consist  ?  In  our  Refusal  to  submit 
to  unwarrantable  Acts  of  Injustice  and  Cruelty? 
If  so,  shew  us  a  Period  in  your  History,  in  which 
you  have  not  been  equally  Seditious. — We  are  ac 
cused  of  aiming  at  Independence ;  but  how  is  this 

1  Frothingham  :   Rise  of  the  Republic,  443-453;    Journals  of  the  Cont. 
Cong.,  iii.,  319,  326-327,  403-404. 
8  N.  E.  Hist.  &  Gen.  Reg.,  xxx.,  326. 
1  Journals  of  the  Cont.  Cong.,  ii.,  158-161. 
4 /#</.,  ii.,  1 66. 


Captain  Jack's  Mission  to  Philadelphia  79 

Accusation  supported  ?  By  the  Allegations  of  your 
Ministers,  not  by  our  Actions."  The  address  to  the 
people  of  Ireland,  reported  by  a  committee  consist 
ing  of  Duane,  W.  Livingston,  and  the  two  Adamses, 
gravely  averred1 :  "  Though  vilified  as  wanting  in 
spirit,  we  are  determined  to  behave  like  men.  Though 
insulted  and  abused,  we  wish  for  reconciliation. 
Though  defamed  as  seditious,  we  are  ready  to  obey 
the  laws.  And,  though  charged  with  rebellion,  will 
cheerfully  bleed  in  defence  of  our  Sovereign  in  a 
righteous  cause.  What  more  can  we  say  ?  What 
more  can  we  offer?"  The  Mecklenburg  resolves 
were  of  a  different  spirit ;  they  bordered  too  near 
on  independence  to  comport  with  the  sincerity  and 
truth  of  the  professions  of  the  Continental  Con 
gress,  and  for  the  success  of  the  petition  to  the 
King.  It  is  likely  that  the  North  Carolina  delegates, 
while  approving  the  resolves  in  so  far  as  they  con 
cerned  Mecklenburg  county,  thought  that  it  would 
be  politic  to  keep  out  of  the  Philadelphia  news 
papers — which  were  the  most  influential  in  America 
and  probably  the  best  known  in  England — the  fact 
that  the  patriots  of  Mecklenburg  regarded  all  Brit 
ish  laws  and  commissions  as  annulled  and  vacated, 
and  the  constitution  of  each  colony  suspended. 
The  delegates  were  no  doubt  informed  by  Captain 
Jack  that  the  resolves  had  been  sent  for  publication 
to  Charleston  and  New-Bern,  and  knew  that  the 
Philadelphia  papers  would  speedily  copy  them. 
Perhaps  Captain  Jack  left  the  copy  at  New-Bern 
when  on  his  way  to  Philadelphia.  He  would  have 

1  Journals  of  the  Co\i,  Cong,^  ii.,  217. 


8o          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

lost  little  time  thereby,  and  have  saved  some  one  a 
long  and  laborious  journey.  At  all  events,  the  May 
3ist  resolves  were  suppressed  in  Philadelphia. 

Six  English  and  two  German  newspapers  were 
published  in  Philadelphia  in  the  summer  of  17/5. 
The  German  newspapers  have  not  been  found. 
The  three  leading  papers,  all  edited  by  stanch 
Whigs,  copied  nearly  all  the  matter  printed  from 
original  sources  in  the  South-Carolina  Gazette; 
And  Country  Journal  of  June  13,  1775,  and  failed 
to  notice  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  printed  therein. 
Dunlafis  Pennsylvania  Packet,  or,  the  General  Ad 
vertiser  of  July  3,  1775,  prints  under  "  South-Caro 
lina,  June  6"  the  Association  adopted  by  the  Pro 
vincial  Congress  of  South  Carolina  on  June  3d, 
and  immediately  afterwards,  under  "June  13,"  an 
item  of  news  concerning  South  Carolina  militia 
word  for  word  as  it  appeared  in  the  South-Carolina 
Gazette ;  And  Country  Journal  of  June  13,  1775. 
The  dates  of  these  items  show  that  they  were  not 
copied  from  the  other  South  Carolina  newspaper, 
which  was  published  weekly,  and  on  June  2d,  Qth, 
and  1 6th,  and  that  the  issues  of  the  South- Carolina 
Gazette;  And  Country  Journal  of  June  6th  and 
1 3th  arrived  in  Philadelphia  at  the  same  time,  prob 
ably  by  the  regular  packet  from  Charleston.  The 
Pennsylvania  Gazette  of  July  5,  1775,  prints  the 
Association  under  "  Charles-Town,  So.  Ca.,  June 
6,"  and  under  "  June  13"  the  same  item  of  South 
Carolina  news  which  was  copied  by  the  Packet ; 
but  the  Gazette  did  not  copy  from  the  Packet,  for 
both  the  Association  and  the  short  item  of  news 


Captain  Jack's  Mission  to  Philadelphia  81 

are  printed  more  nearly  as  they  appear  in  the 
South-Carolina  Gazette;  And  Country  Journal 
than  as  they  appear  in  the  Packet.  A  supplement 
of  the  Pennsylvania  Journal;  and  the  Weekly  Ad 
vertiser,  dated  July  5,  1775,  prints  under  "  Charles- 
Town  (South  Carolina),  June  13,"  all  the  local 
news  in  the  South  Carolina  paper  of  June  I3th, 
only  one  short  item  of  which  was  copied  by  the 
Packet  and  Gazette.  The  other  Charleston  paper 
contained  some  of  the  same  news,  but  not  in  the 
same  words. 

The  three  remaining  Philadelphia  newspapers 
printed  in  English,  the  Ledger,  Mercury,  and  Even 
ing  Post,  had  been  established  only  a  few  months, 
and  the  little  South  Carolina  news  occasionally 
printed  was  probably  copied  in  great  part  from  the 
three  leading  papers  of  the  city.  No  articles  from 
the  South  Carolina  Gazette  ;  And  Country  Journal 
of  June  6th  or  June  I3th  are  to  be  found  in  any  of 
them  except  Story  and  Humphreys  s  Pennsylvania 
Mercury,  and  Universal  Advertiser  of  July  7,  1775, 
which  contains  the  Association  as  it  appears  in  the 
Gazette,  from  which  paper  it  was  probably  copied.  All 
three  of  these  papers  supported  the  cause  of  the 
country,  but  the  printers  of  the  Ledger  and  Evening 
Post  subsequently  became  Tories. 

The  failure  of  the  Philadelphia  papers  to  copy 
the  Mecklenburg  resolves  can  be  accounted  for  only 
by  the  inference  that  the  printers  were  requested 
not  to  copy  them.  We  have  found  no  other  news 
papers  of  this  period  which  copied  from  the  South- 
Carolina  Gazette;  And  Country  Journal  of  June  6th 


82  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

or  June  i3th  and  did  not  copy  the  resolves  which 
surpassed  "all  the  horrid  and  treasonable  publications 
that  the  inflammatory  spirits  of  this  Continent  have 
yet  produced.  "  The  resolves  were  copied  into  New 
York,  Boston,  and  probably  other  newspapers. 
The  New-  York  Journal;  or,  the  General  Adver 
tiser  vi}\me  29,  1775,  conducted  by  John  Holt,  a 
warm  advocate  of  the  cause  of  the  colonies,  copied 
the  Association  and  several  items  of  local  news  from 
the  Soitth-Carolina  Gazette  ;  And  Country  Journal 
of  June  6th  and  June  I3th,  and  the  preamble  and 
first  four  Mecklenburg  resolves,  the  balance  being 
summarized.  Of  the  other  two  New  York  papers, 
the  New-  York  Gazette  ;  and  the  Weekly  Mercury 
of  July  3d  copied  the  Association  and  Charleston 
news  from  the  South- Carolina  and  American  Ga 
zette  of  June  Qth  ;  and  Rivingtoris  New- York  Gaz 
etteer  ;  or,  the  Connecticut,  Hudsori  s  River,  New- 
Jersey,  and  Quebec  Weekly  Advertiser  printed  no 
South  Carolina  news  whatever.  The  Massachusetts 
Spy  or  American  Oracle  of  Liberty  of  July  12,  1775, 
published  in  Worcester,  also  copied  from  the  South 
Carolina  papers  of  June  6th  and  June  I3th,  and 
printed  the  preamble  and  first  four  resolves  of 
Mecklenburg  county.  The  preamble  and  first 
four  resolves  contain  their  continental  features — the 
"  Declaration  of  Independence  " — while  the  others 
concern  only  the  internal  government  of  Mecklen 
burg  county.1 

1  Newspaper  files  of   the  N.  Y.  Public  Library,  library    of  the  N.  Y. 
Historical  Society,  Library  of  Congress,  and  Boston  Public  Library. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE    SALISBURY    RECORDS. 

IF  Independence  was  proclaimed  at  Charlotte  on 
the  2oth  of  May,  1775,  the  news  would  have  spread 
like  wildfire  through  the  surrounding  country.  It 
would  have  reached  Salisbury,  forty  miles  away, 
within  a  day  or  two  later.  Salisbury  was  the  county 
seat  of  Rowan,  and  second  only  to  Charlotte  in 
importance  among  towns  of  the  western  part  of  the 
province  ;  and  the  inhabitants  of  Rowan,  and  partic 
ularly  of  the  town  of  Salisbury,  vied  with  those  of 
Mecklenburg  in  energetically  supporting  the  cause 
of  the  country.  But  on  the  ist  of  June,  1775,  the 
patriots  of  Rowan  county,  assembled  in  Salisbury 
as  the  "  Committee  of  the  County  of  Rowan,  "  had 
not  heard  that  the  adjacent  county  declared  inde 
pendence  twelve  days  before.  On  that  day  they 
addressed  a  letter  to  the  "  Committee  of  the  County 
of  Mecklenburg, "  asking  for  an  interchange  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  committees,  and  concluding 
with  these  words1 :  "  We  beseech  you  likewise  that 
with  us  you  would  lift  your  Hearts  in  undissembled 
prayers  to  the  Disposer  of  all  Events,  that  He 
would  by  his  providence  interpose  against  the 
Counsels  of  designing  Men,  that  we  may  have  our 

1  Col.Rec.of  N.  C,  x.,  u. 

83 


84  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Constitution  as  contained  in  the  Magna  Charta, 
the  charter  of  the  forest,  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act 
and  the  charter  we  brought  over  with  us  handed 
down  unsullied  to  posterity,  and  that  under  God  the 
present  House  of  Hanover  in  legal  succession  may 
be  the  Defender  of  it"  This  loyal  exhortation  could 
not  have  been  addressed  to  men  who  were  known 
to  have  formally  and  publicly  absolved  themselves 
from  allegiance  to  the  Hanoverian  king  twelve 
days  earlier.  On  the  ist  of  June  the  Rowan 
Committee  also  drew  up  a  statement  in  the  name 
of  "  his  Majesty's  Loyal  subjects,  the  Committee 
of  the  County  of  Rowan,  "  in  which  the  committee 
and  the  militia  companies  of  the  county  avowed 
that  it  was  their  duty  "  to  defend  the  Succession 
of  his  present  Majesty  and  the  illustrious  Hano 
verian  line — likewise  the  happy  Constitution  under 
which  we  live,  and  that  it  is  our  Duty  to  Surrender 
our  lives  before  our  Constitutional  privileges  to 
any  set  of  Men  upon  earth."1  We  are  told  that 
after  thus  protesting  their  loyalty  to  the  British 
crown,  although  determined  to  resist  an  oppressive 
ministry,  the  patriots  of  Rowan  unanimously  ap 
proved  a  formal  declaration  of  independence  within 
a  week  later,  when  Captain  Jack  passed  through 
Salisbury ! 

While  the  Rowan  committee  knew  nothing  on  the 
ist  of  June,  1775,  of  a  declaration  of  independence 
publicly  proclaimed  forty  miles  away  nearly  two 
weeks  earlier,  they  were  probably  well  aware  that 
an  order  had  been  issued  for  an  important  meeting 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.,  x.,  lO-n. 


The  Salisbury  Records  85 

of  the  Mecklenburg  committee  on  May  3ist.  The 
heading  of  the  published  document  of  May  31, 
1775,  states  that  the  committee  met  on  that  day. 
This  knowledge,  perhaps,  or  the  arrival  of  some 
one  from  Charlotte  with  news  of  unprecedented 
doings  there,  was  the  occasion  of  the  application  to 
the  Mecklenburg  committee  for  an  account  of  its 
proceedings.  Let  us  change  the  story  of  May  igth 
and  20th  to  May  3ist  and  June  ist,  and  see  well 
how  the  movements  of  several  actors  in  the  story 
and  others  warrant  the  change.  Following  the 
Alexander  narrative  and  the  testimony  of  the  wit 
nesses,  we  shall  assume  that  the  "  delegates  "  were 
in  session  until  late  in  the  night  of  May  3ist,  at 
which  time  the  resolves  were  agreed  upon,  and 
that  the  resolves  were  read  from  the  court-house 
steps  in  the  afternoon,  according  to  the  testimony 
of  Humphrey  Hunter,  of  the  following  day. 

When  the  Salisbury  district  court  met  at  Salis 
bury  on  the  morning  of  the  ist  of  June  the  sheriffs 
of  all  the  six  counties  in  the  district  were  pres 
ent  except  Thomas  Harris,  the  sheriff  of  Meck 
lenburg,  who  was  fined  fifty  pounds  and  ordered  to 
show  cause  for  his  absence  at  the  next  court.  But 
it  was  not  because  Mecklenburg  county  had  de 
clared  independence  twelve  days  before  that  Harris 
did  not  come.  In  the  course  of  the  day  he  arrived 
in  court,  and  returned  his  venire.  The  committee 
meeting  and  militia  muster  at  Charlotte  the  day 
before  probably  detained  him,  and  he  set  out  for 
Salisbury  early  on  the  ist  of  June  and  before  the 
resolves  were  publicly  read.  Hence  he  came  to 


86          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

court  ignorant  of  the  fact  that  Mecklenburg  had 
resolved  that  the  King's  courts  should  no  longer 
administer  justice  for  its  inhabitants.  The  writ  re 
turned  by  Harris  shows  that  he  had  summoned  for 
jury  duty  Hezekiah  Alexander,  Adam  Alexander^ 
John  McKnitt  Alexander,  Robert  Harris,  John  Mc- 
Culloh,  Charles  Polk,  and  Aaron  Houston.  The  first 
three  are  reputed  "  signers  "  of  the  "  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  of  Independence."  Robert  Harris  has 
been  named  in  this  relation,  but  his  granddaughter 
and  her  husband,  who  knew  him  personally,  stated 
that  they  never  understood  that  he  was  one  of  the 
famous  delegates.1  All  of  the  Mecklenburg  jurors 
except  Robert  Harris  and  Charles  Polk  failed  to 
make  their  appearance  and  were  fined  three  pounds 
each.  We  may  be  sure  that  Harris  and  Polk 
would  not  have  heeded  the  summons  of  the  sheriff 
if  Mecklenburg  had  declared  independence  on  May 
2oth.  That  they,  like  the  sheriff,  did  not  know 
what  measures  were  adopted  at  Charlotte  late  in 
the  night  before  the  opening  of  the  court  is  in 
dicated  by  the  fact  that  Charles  Polk  served  on  the 
grand  jury  empanelled  on  June  2d.  It  was  Polk's 
father,  according  to  the  story  of  the  i  gih  and  2Oth 
of  May,  that  read  the  resolutions  from  the  steps  of 
the  court-house  in  Charlotte,  which  circumstance 
he  would  surely  have  known  if  it  took  place  on  the 
alleged  date.  On  June  6th,  the  last  day  of  the 
court,  after  Captain  Jack's  papers  had  been  read 

1  Sketch  of  Robert  Harris  in  Graham's  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 
of  Independence \  132-134,  copied  from  Lyman  C.  Draper's  manuscript  work 
on  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  in  the  possession  of  the  State  Historical 
Society  of  Wisconsin. 


The  Salisbury  Records  87 

by  William  Kennon  at  the  instance  of  the  presid 
ing  judge,  Alexander  Martin,  a  stanch  Whig,  the 
fine  imposed  upon  the  sheriff  of  Mecklenburg  was 
remitted.  1 

1  The  minutes  of  this  court  are  printed  in  the  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.,  X.,  1-9. 


CHAPTER  VII 

"AN    ACCUMULATION    OF    MIRACLES  " 

THE  acts  and  declarations  of  several  of  the  re 
puted  "  signers "  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration 
of  Independence  during  the  period  from  May  20, 
1775,  to  July  4,  1776,  form  a  very  striking  part  of 
the  "accumulation  of  miracles"  which  confronts 
the  orthodox  North  Carolinian.  William  Kennon, 
a  lawyer  of  Salisbury,  renowned  for  an  eloquent 
and  effective  speech  before  the  meeting  at  Charlotte 
on  May  20,  1775,  and  as  one  of  a  committee  of 
three  appointed  to  draft  the  declaration,  resumed 
the  practice  of  his  profession  in  the  King's  court  at 
Salisbury  on  June  2,  I775.1  Waightstill  A  very, 
another  who  is  said  to  have  joined  in  the  Declara 
tion  of  Independence  on  the  2Oth  of  May,  was 
appointed  "  Attorney  for  the  Crown,"  say  the  Salis 
bury  court  records,  on  August  2,  I775.2  Every 
other  participant  at  the  famous  meeting  in  Meck 
lenburg  whose  attitude  toward  Great  Britain  is 

i  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.,  x.,  5.  Kennon  was  chairman  of  the  Rowan  com 
mittee  at  all  of  its  meetings  before  that  of  June  I,  1775.  It  seems  that 
through  the  influence  of  John  Dunn,  a  Tory,  he  was  not  returned  as  a  mem 
ber  at  the  election  of  February,  1775.  His  ability  probably  procured  him  an 
invitation  to  a  seat  in  the  meeting  at  Mecklenburg. 

9  Ibid,  x.,  139. 

88 


"  An  Accumulation  of  Miracles  "        89 

ascertained   from    contemporaneous    records    may 
also  be  taxed  with  this  infirmity  of  pu  rpose. 

It  is  very  surprising  that  the  records  of  the  courts 
held  at  Charlotte  between  May  20,  1775,  and  July 
4,  1776,  have  been  overlooked  by  writers  who  have 
sought  to  prove  that  Mecklenburg  county  was  then 
severed  from  all  political  connection  with  Great 
Britain.  The  justices  of  the  county  courts  of 
Mecklenburg  during  this  period  were  Robert 
Harris,  Abraham  Alexander,  Robert  Irwin,  Richard 
Barry,  John  Foard,  Hezekiah  Alexander,  and  Adam 
Alexander,  and  they  sat  in  July  and  October,  1775, 
and  in  January,  April,  and  July,  1776.  Although 
these  men  are  all  said  to  have  formally  absolved 
themselves  from  allegiance  to  King  George  III. 
on  the  2Oth  of  May,  1775,  the  minutes  and  dockets 
of  their  courts  show  that  they  administered  justice 
in  the  King's  name.  The  criminal  dockets  are 
uniformly  marked  "  Crown  Causes,"  and  generally 
signed  by  three  or  more  of  these  alleged  "  signers  " 
of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration.  The  following 
is  extracted  from  the  minutes  of  the  court  held  so 
late  as  July,  1776  : 

Joshua  Jennings  being  cited  to  appear  before  the  court, 
came  and  was  bound  in  the  sum  of  ^100.  Henry  Sadler  his 
surity  bound  in  the  sum  of  ^£50,  to  be  void  on  condition  that 
said  Jennings  keep  the  peace  to  all  his  Majesty's  leige  subjects 
and  particularly  to  John  Shields. 

Ordered  by  the  court  that  the  several  dockets  stand  con 
tinued  from  July  sessions  to  October  sessions,  with  all  rules 
and  orders  thereon,  viz  : — The  tryal,  execution,  crown  and 
appearance  dockets  as  they  were  at  January  sessions  1776. 

Such  entries  upon  the  minutes  and  dockets  of 


90          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

the  courts  of  Mecklenburg  were  not  discontinued 
until  after  July,  1776.  When  the  county  court  rose 
in  July  the  news  of  the  passage  of  the  Declaration 
of  Independence  at  Philadelphia  on  the  4th  of  the 
month  had  not  reached  the  justices,  and  they  con 
sequently  provided  for  the  hearing  of  pleas  of  the 
crown  at  the  usual  October  session.  That  session 
was  never  held,  however,  as  by  that  time  the  jus 
tices  had  learned  that  they  were  no  longer  "  his 
Majesty's  leige  subjects."  On  the  page  in  the 
docket  book  in  direct  continuation  from  entries  of 
three  "  New  Crown  Causes  to  January  session, 
A.  D.  1776"  (meaning  1777),  comes  "  State  of 
North  Carolina  Causes  to  July  session,  1 777."  The 
promulgators  of  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  of  May 
31,  1775,  declared  all  royal  authority  to  be  sus 
pended,  but  not  that  their  allegiance  to  the  crown 
was  dissolved.1 

In  the  Provincial  Congress  which  met  at  Hills- 
boro  August  20,  1775,  Mecklenburg  county  was 
represented  by  Thomas  Polk,  the  prime  mover  of 
the  alleged  declaration,  John  McKnitt  Alexander, 
John  Phifer,  Waightstill  A  very,  Samuel  Martin, 
and  James  Houston,  all  reputed  "signers"  except 
the  two  last  named.  William  Kennon  took  his 
seat  as  a  delegate  from  Rowan.  On  the  first  day 
of  its  session  the  Congress  appointed  a  committee 
to  prepare  a  "Test"  to  be  signed  by  all  members.2 

1  The  facts  concerning  the  records  at  Charlotte  were  obtained  from  Mr. 
A.   S.   Salley,  Jr.,    of   Columbia,   S.    C.,    and   from  Prof.   John  Spencer 
Bassett's  report  on  North  Carolina  archives  in  the  Annual  Report  of  the 
American  Historical  Association  for  1894.)  609—611. 

2  Col.  Rec.  ofN.  C.,  x.,  169. 


"  An  Accumulation  of  Miracle"          91 

The  "  Test  "  was  reported,  approved,  and  signed  on 
August  23d.     It  ran  as  follows  : 

We  the  Subscribers  professing  our  Allegiance  to  the  King, 
and  acknowledging  the  Constitutional  executive  power  of  Gov 
ernment,  do  solemnly  profess,  testifie  and  declare  that  we  do 
absolutely  believe  that  neither  the  Parliament  of  Great  Brit 
ain,  nor  any  Member  or  Constituent  Branch  thereof,  have  a 
right  to  impose  Taxes  upon  these  Colonies  to  regulate  the  in 
ternal  policy  thereof  ;  and  that  all  attempts  by  fraud  or  force 
to  establish  and  exercise  such  Claims  and  powers  are  viola 
tions  of  the  peace  and  Security  of  the  people  and  ought  to  be 
resisted  to  the  utmost;  and  that  the  people  of  this  province, 
singly  and  collectively,  are  bound  by  the  Acts  and  resolutions  of 
the  Continental  and  the  Provincial  Congresses,  because  in  both 
they  are  freely  represented  by  persons  chosen  by  themselves  ; 
and  we  do  solemnly  and  sincerely  promise  and  engage,  under 
the  Sanction  of  virtue,  Honor,  and  the  Sacred  love  of  Liberty 
and  our  Country,  to  maintain  and  Support  all  and  every  the 
Acts,  Resolutions  and  Regulations,  of  the  said  Continental 
and  Provincial  Congresses,  to  the  utmost  of  our  power  and 
abilities.  In  Testimony  whereof,  we  have  hereto  set  our 
Hands  this  23d  August  1775. 

To  this  "  Test  of  Loyalty  and  Patriotism  "  the 
five  men  who  are  said  to  have  pledged  their  mutual 
co-operation,  their  lives,  their  fortunes,  and  their 
sacred  honor,  on  May  2oth,  to  maintain  a  de 
claration  of  independence  subscribed  their  names 
on  August  23d.1 

Thomas  Polk  and  William  Kennon  were  mem 
bers  of  a  committee  appointed  by  the  Congress  to 
prepare  a  plan  "  for  the  Internal  peace,  order  and 
safety  "  of  the  province,2  the  report  of  which  was 

1  Col  Rec.  of  N.  C.j  x.,  171-173.  The  original  manuscript  Journal 
containing  their  signatures  to  the  test  is  in  the  Boston  Pub.  Lib.  The  test  is 
here  reproduced  from  it.  5  fbid.,  x,  175. 


92          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

considered  and  adopted  September  10,  I775.1  They 
recommended  that  a  Provincial  Council,  a  Committee 
of  Safety  in  every  district,  and  a  committee  in 
every  county  be  established,  and  that  every  member 
of  any  of  these  bodies,  every  member  of  a  future 
Provincial  Congress,  and  every  person  who  voted 
for  members  of  any  of  these  bodies  should  repeat 
and  subscribe  the  above  test.  Independent  Meck 
lenburg  county  was  not  excepted.  Wherever  con 
temporaneous  records  are  extant  we  find  that  the 
test  was  actually  subscribed.  The  Mecklenburg 
member  in  the  Committee  of  Safety  for  the  Sal 
isbury  district  was  Hezekiah  Alexander,  a  puta 
tive  "  signer  "  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration. 2 
Waightstill  Avery,  as  a  member  of  the  Provincial 
Council,  again  subscribed  the  test  on  October  19, 
1775,  December  18,  1775,  and  February  28,  1776, 
and  John  Phifer,  John  McKnitt  Alexander,  and 
Robert  Irwin,  still  another  "  signer,"  subscribed  it  in 
the  Provincial  Congress  as  late  as  April  4,  1776. 3 

On  September  4,  1775,  the  Congress  declared, 
after  due  consideration,  that  Franklin's  plan  for  a 
confederation  of  the  colonies  was  "  not  at  present 
Eligible,"  and  "That  the  present  Association  ought 
to  be  further  relied  on  for  bringing  about  a  recon 
ciliation  with  the  parent  State,  and  a  further  Con 
federacy  ought  only  to  be  adopted  in  Case  of  the 
last  necessity."4  The  Articles  of  American  As 
sociation,  of  October,  1774,  had  been  and  were  still 
being  signed  by  all  persons  under  penalty  of  being 

1  Co!.   A'ec.   of  N.   C.,   x.,  208-214.  *  Ibid.,  x.,    215. 

*  Ibid..*.,  284,349,  470,  £02.  4  Ibid.,  x.,  175,  IQ2. 


"  An  Accumulation  of  Miracles  "        93 

shut  off  from  intercourse  with  those  friendly  to  the 
cause  of  the  colonies. 1  The  Congress  resolved  that 
the  new  local  committees  that  were  to  be  formed 
should  superintend  their  observance. a  These  ar 
ticles  acknowledged  allegiance  to  the  British 
Crown,  yet  the  following  document  shows  that 
they  were  signed  in  Mecklenburg,  as  in  other  parts 
of  the  province,  long  after  May,  1775  : 

NORTH  CAROLINA,  MECKLENBURG  COUNTY,    ) 

November  28,  1775.    f 

These  may  certify  to  all  whom  they  may  concern,  that 
the  bearer  hereof,  William  Henderson,  is  allowed  here  to 
be  a  true  friend  to  liberty,  and  signed  the  Association. 

Certified  by  ABR'M  ALEXANDER,  Chairman 

of  the  Committee  of  P.  S.* 

Here  Abraham  Alexander,  who  is  said  to  have 
been  chairman  of  the  meeting  at  which  independ 
ence  was  declared  in  Mecklenburg  on  May  20, 
1775,  testifies  over  his  own  signature  five  months 
later  that  one  who  professed  to  be  a  loyal  subject 
of  George  III.  was  "  allowed"  in  Mecklenburg "  to 
be  a  true  friend  to  liberty  "  ! 

On  September  8,  1775,  "Mr.  [William]  Hooper," 
reads  the  Journal  of  the  Congress,  4  "  laid  before  the 
house  an  Address  to  the  Inhabitants  of  the  British 
Empire  ;  and  the  same  being  read,  was  unanimously 

1  Col.   Rec.   of  N.  C.,     x.,    125,    297,    etc.  *  Ibid.,   x.,    171,    213. 

8  State  Pamphlet ;  see  Appendix.  It  may  be  noted  here  that  the 
"  Instructions  for  the  Delegates  of  Mecklenburg  County"  which  are  printed 
under  date  of  September  i,  1775,  in  Foote's  Sketches  of  N.  C.,  70-73, 
Wheeler's  History  of  N.  C.,  ii.,  260-262,  and  the  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.,  x., 
239-242,  should  bear  the  date  of  September  i,  1776.  D.  L.  Swain  to  B. 
J.  Lossing,  Bancroft,  MSS.,  N.  Y.  Pub.  Lib.  Swain  had  the  original  MS. 

*  Col.  Rec.  of  N.   C.,  x.,   201-202. 


94          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

received,  .  .  .  '  In  this  address,  drafted  by  an 
alleged  supporter  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration 
of  Independence,  five  alleged  authors  of  that 
Declaration  united  with  their  associates  in  the 
Provincial  Congress  in  declaring  : 

To  enjoy  the  Fruits  of  our  own  honest  Industry  ;  to  call 
that  our  own  which  we  earn  with  the  labour  of  our  hands  and 
the  sweat  of  our  Brows  ;  to  regulate  that  internal  policy  by 
which  we  and  not  they  [the  British  ministers]  are  to  be 
affected  ;  these  are  the  mighty  Boons  we  ask.  And  Traitors, 
Rebels,  and  every  harsh  appellation  that  Malice  can  dictate 
or  the  Virulence  of  language  express,  are  the  returns  which 
we  receive  to  the  most  humble  Petitions  and  earnest  sup 
plications.  We  have  been  told  that  Independence  is  our  object; 
that  we  seek  to  shake  off  all  connection  with  the  parent  State. 
Cruel  Suggestion  !  Do  not  all  our  professions,  all  our  actions, 
uniformly  contradict  this  ? 

We  again  declare,  and  we  invoke  that  Almighty  Being  who 
searches  the  Recesses  of  the  human  heart  and  knows  our  most 
secret  Intentions,  that  it  is  our  most  earnest  wish  and  prayer  to 
be  restored  with  the  other  United  Colonies,  to  the  State  in 
which  we  and  they  were  placed  before  the  year  1763,  .  .  . 

But  the  authors  of  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  of 
May  31,  1775,  could  consistently  give  their  assent 
to  the  address.  The  address  continues  : 

Whenever  we  have  departed  from  the  Forms  of  the  Con 
stitution,  our  own  safety  and  self-preservation  have  dictated  the 
expedient ;  ...  As  soon  as  the  cause  of  our  Fears  and  Ap 
prehensions  are  removed,  with  joy  will  we  return  these  powers 
to  their  regular  channels  ;  and  such  Institutions  formed  from 
mere  necessity,  shall  end  with  that  necessity  that  created 
them.  .  .  .  This  declaration  we  hold  forth  as  a  Testimony 
of  Loyalty  to  our  Sovereign,  and  Affection  to  our  parent 
State,  and  as  a  sincere  earnest  of  our  present  and  future 
intentions. 


"An  Accumulation  of  Miracles  "        95 

Dr.  George  W.  Graham,  the  leading  exponent 
of  the  arguments  for  the  authenticity  of  the  Meck 
lenburg  Declaration,  would  explain  away  some  of 
these  inconsistent  acts  and  declarations  of  its  al 
leged  authors  by  admitting  the  insincerity  of  their 
professions.1  He  argues  that  signers  of  the  Meck 
lenburg  Declaration  could  consistently  sign  the 
test  adopted  by  the  Hillsboro  Congress,  because, 
"  Saving  the  first  two  lines,  probably  thrown  in  for 
the  sake  of  the  scrupulous  or  disaffected  members 
of  the  Provincial  Congress,  this  test  contains  an 
emphatic  denial  of  all  authority  of  Parliament  over 
the  Colonies,"  and,  "  as  the  last  paragraph  of  the 
test,  like  the  codicil  to  a  will,  annulled  all  conflict 
ing  clauses,  the  delegates,  as  their  proceedings 
prove,  considered  themselves  bound  only  by  that." 
Not  by  the  greatest  stretch  of  imagination  can  the 
test  be  thus  interpreted.  It  denies  only  the  right 
of  a  Parliament  in  which  the  colonies  were  not 
represented  (according  to  the  American  theory  of 
representation)  "  to  impose  taxes  upon  these  colonies 
to  regulate  the  internal  policy  thereof  "/  and  it  con 
tains  nothing  which  conflicts  with  a  profession  of 
allegiance  to  the  King  and  an  acknowledgment  of 
the  constitutional  executive  power  of  his  govern 
ment.  Like  the  address  to  the  inhabitants  of 
Great  Britain,  which  elaborately  defines  the  posi 
tion  of  the  Hillsboro  Congress,  it  enunciates  the 
great  principle  for  which  the  colonies  were  con 
tending,  and  in  contending  for  which,  even  when 
forced  to  take  up  arms  and  to  assume  control  of 

1  The  Mecklenbtirg  Declaration,  63-79. 


96          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

civil  affairs,  the  popular  leaders  considered  the 
British  ministers,  not  themselves,  to  be  disloyal 
to  the  British  Constitution.  But,  failing  to  take 
into  account  the  known  sentiments  which  prompted 
men  outside  of  North  Carolina  to  like  actions, 
Dr.  Graham  holds  that  the  assembling  of  the 
Hillsboro  Congress  in  disobedience  to  a  furious 
proclamation  of  Governor  Martin,  its  orders  for 
the  enlistment  of  troops,  and  its  adoption  of  other 
measures  "  inimical,"  he  says,  "  to  the  King  and 
Parliament,"  show  that  that  body  was  composed 
of  men  who  had  cast  off  their  allegiance  to  the 
King,  in  spite  of  their  professions  to  the  contrary, 
and  that  it  was  therefore  a  proper  place  for 
"  signers  "  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration.  He 
claims  also  that  when  the  Hillsboro  Congress 
adopted  its  plan  "for  the  internal  peace,  order 
and  safety "  of  the  province,  it  entirely  severed 
North  Carolina  from  the  mother  country.  For 
the  same  reasons,  the  American  Tories,  the  British 
Government,  and  the  older  British  historians  treated 
the  course  of  the  Continental  Congress  as  a  piece 
of  dissimulation.  But  the  sincerity  of  the  pro 
fessions  of  the  popular  party  may  be  tested  by 
statements  of  men  of  sterling  integrity  too  nu 
merous  and  too  familiar  to  be  cited  here.  "  When 
the  Barons  at  Runnymede,  surrounded  by  their 
armed  retainers,  wrested  from  King  John  the  Great 
Charter,  they  meant  not  to  renounce  their  allegi 
ance,  but  simply  to  preserve  the  old  government. 
.  .  .  So  the  popular  leaders,  in  their  attitude  of 
armed  resistance,  were  loyal  to  what  they  conceived 


"  An  Accumulation  of  Miracles  "        97 

to  be  essential  to  American  liberty.  " 1  We  have 
not  to  rely  upon  public  professions  of  the 
popular  party  in  North  Carolina  to  prove  that 
there,  as  in  the  other  colonies,  the  idea  of  in 
dependence  was  of  sudden  growth  ;  that  the  old 
affection  for  the  mother  country  was  not  at  once 
effaced  by  civil  war,  and  that  reconciliation  was 
the  aim  of  the  Hillsboro  Congress.  The  following 
statements  of  men  who  had  an  intimate  knowledge 
of  the  affairs  of  the  province  are  proof  of  all  this, 
and  a  new  "accumulation  of  miracles"  for  the 
advocates  of  the  authenticity  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration. 

On  July  31,  1775,  two  months  after  the  alleged 
promulgation  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  In 
dependence,  "  a  gentleman  in  North  Carolina  and 
one  of  the  Delegates  of  the  Congress,"  apparently 
Joseph  Hewes,  wrote  in  a  private  letter  from 
Edenton  2 : 

We  do  not  want  to  be  independent ;  we  want  no  revolution, 
unless  a  change  of  Ministry  and  measures  would  be  deemed 
such.  We  are  loyal  subjects  to  our  present  most  gracious 
Sovereign  in  support  of  whose  crown  and  dignity  we  would 
sacrifice  our  lives,  and  willingly  launch  out  every  shilling  of 
our  property,  he  only  defending  our  liberties.  .  .  .  We  can  vouch 
for  the  loyalty  of  every  one  in  this  part  of  the  province. 

The  writer  was  probably  unwilling  to  vouch  for 
the  loyalty  of  every  one  in  the  province  because  of 
the  independent  spirit  of  the  Mecklenburg  resolves 
of  May  31,  1775.  He  certainly  had  not  heard  that 

1  Frothingham,  Rise  of  the  Republic,  438. 
*  Col.  Rec.  of  N,  C.,  x.,  123. 


98          The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

the  leading  county  of  western  North  Carolina  had 
formally  declared  independence. 

On  September  17,  1775,  Thomas  McKnight,  a 
lukewarm  friend  to  the  American  cause,  if  not  a 
Tory,  wrote1  from  his  home  in  Belville,  N.  C.,  to 
Samuel  Johnston,  President  of  the  Hillsboro  Con 
gress,  which  had  risen  a  week  previously,  and 
enclosed  extracts  from  an  intercepted  letter  of 
John  Adams  to  Joseph  Warren. 

Should  you  however  believe  the  letter  to  be  genuine,  as  I 
firmly  do  [he  wrote],  it  may  incline  you  to  examine  the  truth 
of  my  suspicions,  that  there  is,  and  has  been  from  the  be 
ginning  of  the  dispute,  a  fixed  design  in  some  peoples  breasts 
to  throw  off  every  connection  with  G.  [reat]  B.  [ritain]  and  to 
act  for  the  future  as  totally  independant ;  now  however  suit 
able  this  may  be  to  the  Northern  provinces,  I  cannot  think  it 
adapted  to  our  circumstances — but  notwithstanding  I  am  con 
vinced  no  such  designs  are  harboured  in  this  province,  I  cannot 
help  thinking  we  are  gradually  and  step  by  step  drawn  in  to 
second  them  as  effectually  as  if  we  had  been  originally 
concerned  in  the  plan. 

Here  was  a  man  of  prominence  in  North 
Carolina  politics  who  had  not  heard  as  late  as 
September,  1775,  that  one  person  in  the  pro 
vince,  much  less  a  whole  county,  even  desired 
independence ! 

In  a  letter  to  Lord  Dartmouth,  dated  October  16, 
1775,  Governor  Josiah  Martin  expressed  his  pleasure 
in  seeing  that  there  was  "  temper  and  moderation 
enough  "in  the  Hillsboro  Congress  to  reject  for 
the  present  Franklin's  plan  of  a  confederation  of 
united  colonies,  and  stated  that  this  paper  "  like 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.,  x.,  249-251. 


"  An  Accumulation  of  Miracles  "        99 

many  of  the  publications  of  the  Continental  Con 
gress  has  so  much  of  the  appearance  of  system  and 
breathes  so  strongly  the  spirit  of  independence  that 
with  the  best  inclinations  to  construe  the  designs 
of  the  Leaders  of  American  Politics  in  the  most 
favorable  and  liberal  manner  it  is  difficult  for  the 
most  impartial  and  unprejudiced  mind  to  believe 
their  uniform  professions  and  declarations  against 
any  views  of  that  nature,  it  is  nevertheless  far  from 
me  and  my  intentions  to  judge  them.  Heaven 
knows  what  are  the  real  views  of  them  at  large  /  " 
Is  it  possible  that  Mecklenburg  county  declared 
independence  in  May,  1775,  and  that  the  people  of 
the  adjacent  counties  approved  that  declaration, 
if,  five  months  later,  the  royal  governor  of  North 
Carolina  was  ignorant  of  the  views  of  the  people  of 
the  province  on  the  subject  of  independence  ?  Gov 
ernor  Martin  said  that  the  people  seemed  "generally 
united  on  the  points  of  opposition  to  Britain."  1 

As  late  as  February  n,  1776,  after  the  idea  of 
independence  had  taken  root  in  the  colonies,  Joseph 
Hewes,  one  of  the  North  Carolina  delegates  to  the 
Continental  Congress,  did  not  know  whether  his 
constituents  had  yet  given  up  hope  of  reconciliation 
with  the  mother  country.  On  that  date  he  wrote 
from  Philadelphia  to  Samuel  Johnston  in  North 
Carolina,  and  sent  as  a  "  Curiosity "  a  copy  of 
Thomas  Paine's  Common  Sense,  advocating  a  separ 
ation  from  Great  Britain,  which  had  been  published 
in  Philadelphia  about  a  month  before.  He  said  that 
he  and  his  colleagues  from  North  Carolina  sent 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C,  x.,  268-270. 


ioo        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

no  copies  of  the  pamphlet  by  a  wagon  of  military 
supplies  destined  for  the  province  because  they 
did  not  know  how  the  people  there  "  might  relish 
independency.  "  i 

James  Iredell  of  Edenton,  an  associate  justice  of 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  during 
Washington's  administration,  was  an  eyewitness 
of  the  course  of  events  in  North  Carolina  during 
the  Revolutionary  period.  His  correspondence 
was  courted  by  the  ablest  men  of  the  province,  yet 
it  contains  not  a  word  of  so  important  an  event  as 
a  declaration  of  independence  by  Mecklenburg 
county.  From  an  essay  dated  June,  1776,  which  is 
believed  to  have  had  a  very  extended  circulation 
among  prominent  men  of  North  Carolina,  pas 
sing  in  manuscript  from  hand  to  hand,  we  ex 
tract  the  following  testimony  of  Iredell2 : 

I  avoid  the  unhappy  subject  of  the  day,  independency.  There 
was  a  time  very  lately,  within  my  recollection,  when  neither 
myself  nor  any  person  I  know,  could  hear  the  name  but  with 
horror.  I  know  it  is  a  favorite  argument  against  us,  and  that 
on  which  the  proceedings  of  Parliament  are  most  plausibly 
founded,  that  this  has  been  our  aim  since  the  beginning,  and 
all  other  attempts  were  a  cloak  and  disguise  to  this  principal 
one.  If  this  supposition  had  been  well  founded,  and  a  desire 
of  redressing  the  grievances  we  complained  of  been  entertained 
by  government,  they  might  immediately,  by  granting  these, 
have  detected  and  disappointed  the  other,  or  covered  us  with 
eternal  disgrace,  if  we  avowed  it.  But  it  is  sufficient  to  say, 
our  professions  have  been  all  solemnly  to  the  contrary  ;  we 
have  never  taken  any  one  step  which  really  indicated  such  a  view;  3 

1  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.,x.,  447. 

2  McRee's  Life  and  Correspondence  of  James  Iredell,  i,  321 — 322. 

3  The  italics  are  the  present  author's. 


"  An  Accumulation  of  Miracles  "      101 

its  suggestion  has  no  better  foundation  than  mere  suspicion, 
which  might  countenance  any  falsehood  whatever,  and  every 
man  in  America  knows  that  this  is  one  of  the  most  egregious 
falsehoods  ever  any  people  were  duped  with. 

In  another  manuscript  pamphlet,  addressed  to 
the  King  of  Great  Britain,  bearing  date,  March,  1777, 
Iredell  again  replied  to  the  above  charge  as  follows: a 

I  do  aver  the  charge  to  be  false,  and  dare  appeal  to  the  great 
Searcher  of  all  hearts  for  the  truth  of  my  present  declaration. 
I  have  resided  many  years  in  America  ;  I  have  had  the  honor 
of  a  personal  intimacy  with  several  of  the  most  considerable 
characters,  and  firmest  patriots  in  it  ;  I  have  had  many  interest 
ing  and  confidential  conversations  with  them  upon  this  great 
and  affecting  subject.  I  know  well  the  general  sentiments  of 
the  people  at  large.  When  this  unhappy  controversy  first  be 
gan,  and  until  very  near  the  time  when  the  arbitrary  obstinacy  of 
your  conduct  left  us  no  other  alternative  than  indefinite  submission  a 
to  your  will,  or  unreserved  resistance  to  your  power,  I  never 
heard  a  man  speak  on  the  subject  of  independence,  who  did  not 
speak  of  it  with  aborrence  and  indignation,  and  place  the  hope 
of  all  his  felicity  in  a  happy  and  honorable  reconcilation  with 
Great  Britain. 

This  completes  our  study  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  of  Independence  in  the  light  of  con 
temporaneous  testimony.  We  have  learned  that 
researches  during  a  period  of  nearly  a  century  have 
failed  to  produce  a  single  item  of  contemporaneous 
evidence  of  so  remarkable  an  event  as  a  declaration 
of  independence  by  Mecklenburg  county  on  the 
2Oth  of  May,  1775.  Voluminous  contemporaneous 
records  are  not  merely  silent  concerning  it ;  they 
tell  us  that  for  several  months  after  the  date  on 

i  McRee's  Life  and  Correspondence  of  James  Iredell,  i,  344. 
8  This  passage  is  not  italicised  in  the  original. 


102        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

which  the  declaration  is  alleged  to  have  been  pro 
claimed,  amid  the  joyous  shouts  of  assembled 
thousands,  there  was  not  even  a  conscious  striv 
ing  for  independence  perceptible  in  North  Carolina. 
The  statements  of  the  royal  governor,  Josiah  Mar 
tin,  and  of  other  well-informed  men,  prove  that 
they  knew  nothing  of  the  supposed  declaration  of 
independence.  The  subsequent  acts  and  declara 
tions  of  reputed  authors  and  supporters  of  the 
declaration  are  inconsistent  with  it,  and  if  the 
document  be  authentic,  they  fix  an  ineffaceable 
stigma  to  their  characters.  Our  investigations 
have  also  revealed  the  fact  that  a  document  similar 
in  many  of  its  terms  to  the  document  of  May  20, 
1775,  and  easily  mistaken  fora  declaration  of  in 
dependence,  was  adopted  in  Mecklenburg  county 
on  May  3 1,  1775.  This  document  is  entirely  incon 
sistent  with  the  declaration  of  eleven  days  earlier. 
It  was  published  in  every  city  in  the  Carolinas 
where  there  were  newspapers,  copied  into  New 
York  and  Boston  newspapers,  and  suppressed  in 
Philadelphia,  because  it  was  "premature,"  Gover 
nor  Martin  virtually  called  it  a  declaration  of  inde 
pendence.  Our  researches  have  shown  that  the 
most  significant  facts  and  circumstances  in  the 
story  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Indepen 
dence  are  peculiar  to  the  May  3ist  resolves,  and 
that  all  the  evidence  which  is  cited  in  support 
of  the  authenticity  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declara 
tion  should  therefore  be  understood  as  relating  to 
the  May  3ist  resolves.  At  every  step  in  our  ex 
amination  of  contemporaneous  testimony  we  have 


"An  Accumulation  of  Miracles*'       103 

found  it  to  conflict  with  the  testimony  of  those  who 
say,  on  the  strength  of  memory,  hearsay,  or  as 
sumption,  that  Mecklenburg  county  declared  inde 
pendence  on  the  2Oth  of  May,  1775. 


CHAPTER   VIII 

ORIGIN    OF    THE    MYTH 

HOWEVER  manifest  may  be  the  inconsistency  of  a 
declaration  of  independence  by  the  people  of  Meck 
lenburg  county  on  the  2Oth  of  May,  1775,  with  their 
resolves  of  May  31,  1775,  and  contemporaneous 
testimony,  the  time-honored  and  patriotic  belief  in 
the  event  that  prevails  in  North  Carolina  will  never 
be  entirely  dispelled  until  the  common  error  of 
many  men  in  believing  that  they  heard  a  declaration 
of  independence  read  at  Charlotte  in  ,1775  is  more 
satisfactorily  explained,  and  the  existence  of  sev 
eral  documents  purporting  to  contain  the  text  of 
that  declaration,  which  are  very  unlike  the  docu 
ment  which  we  affirm  to  be  their  prototype,  is 
accounted  for.  An  attempt  will  be  made  to  trace 
the  origin  and  genesis  of  the  erroneous  belief  that 
the  Mecklenburg  resolves  of  May  31,  1775,  consti 
tuted  a  declaration  of  independence ;  to  show  that 
a  quarter  century  after  their  promulgation  a  mem 
ber  of  the  body  that  adopted  them  endeavored  to 
recall  their  date  and  salient  features  ;  and  that  from 
the  rough  notes  he  jotted  down  sprang  every 
version  of  the  supposititious  paper  of  May  2oth. 

104 


Origin  of  the  Myth  105 

The  nature  of  the  May  3ist  resolves  and  their 
relation  to  the  political  situation  in  the  colonies  at 
the  time  of  their  adoption  have  been  treated.  All 
British  authority  and  forms  of  government  were 
declared  to  be  suspended,  and  a  county  govern 
ment  set  up  until  another  should  be  provided  by 
the  Provincial  or  Continental  Congresses,  or  until 
Great  Britain  should  abandon  her  arbitrary  policy 
towards  the  colonies.  It  was  ordained  that  officers 
appointed  under  the  resolves  should  hold  and  exer 
cise  their  authority  by  virtue  of  popular  choice  and 
"  independent  of  the  crown  of  Great  Britain  and 
former  constitution  of  this  province,"  and  that 
whatever  person  should  thereafter  receive  a  com 
mission  from  the  crown,  or  attempt  to  exercise  any 
such  commission  theretofore  received,  should  be 
deemed  "  an  enemy  to  his  country,"  and  summarily 
dealt  with.  This  was  in  some  degree  a  declaration 
of  independence — what  might  be  termed  a  declara 
tion  of  temporary  independence.  No  profession  of 
allegiance  or  the  slightest  indication  of  a  desire  for 
reconciliation  with  the  mother  country,  which  ap 
pear  in  nearly  all  other  contemporaneous  papers  of 
its  kind,  are  to  be  found  in  the  Mecklenburg  mani 
festo  ;  and  the  clause  implying  a  possibility  of  a 
future  adjustment  of  political  relations  is  itself  an 
opprobrious  affront  to  British  authority.  So  inde 
pendent  in  spirit  are  these  resolves  that  from  the 
time  when  Peter  Force  announced  their  discovery, 
in  1838,  to  the  present  day,  they  have,  after  due 
consideration,  been  repeatedly  called  a  declaration 
of  independence.  Peter  Force  describes  them  as 


io6        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

"  a  general  Declaration  of  Independence  of  all  the 
Colonies."1  William  H.  Foote  says,  in  \^ Sketches 
of  North  Carolina,  that  in  the  May  3ist  resolves 
"  independence  is  asserted  in  language  as  strong  as 
in  the  paper  of  the  2Oth."  2  Foote  devotes  a  large 
portion  of  his  volume  to  the  Mecklenburg  Declara 
tion.  An  article  in  the  New  York  Times  of  Feb 
ruary  2,  1853,  signed  "  North  Carolina,"  which 
evinces  a  familiarity  with  the  question  under  discus 
sion,  takes  this  view  of  the  matter :  "  That  the 
patriots  of  Mecklenburg  did  make  a  formal  Decla 
ration  of  Independence  in  May,  1775,  no  fair  man 
can  doubt.  The  only  question  is,  was  it  done  by 
the  paper  of  the  2oth  of  May  or  by  that  of  the 
3Oth?"  Benson  J.  Lossing  prints  the  May  3ist 
resolves  in  his  Pictorial  Field  Book  of  the  Revolu 
tion  as  the  "  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Independ 
ence."  3  After  a  review  of  the  evidence  cited  in 
support  of  the  paper  of  May  2Oth,  he  concludes 
that  its  genuineness  is  "a  question  of  minor  his 
torical  importance,  since  the  great  fact  is  established 
beyond  cavil,  that  more  than  a  year  previous  to 
the  promulgation  of  the  Federal  Declaration  the 
people  of  Mecklenburg  declared  their  entire  inde 
pendence  of  the  British  crown,  and,  in  pursuance  of 
that  declaration,  organized  a  civil  government." 
John  H.  Wheeler,  the  North  Carolina  historian, 
whose  writings  on  the  mooted  question  cover  a 
period  of  forty  years,  said  in  one  of  his  last  con- 

1  Daily  National  Intelligencer,  December  18,  1838. 

2  Sketches  of  N.  C.  (1846),  208. 
8 1852  ed.,  ii,  617-623. 


Origin  of  the  Myth  107 

tributions  to  the  history  of  the   subject:1  "Both 
without  doubt  were  passed.    Either  settles  the  fact 
that  the  people  of  Mecklenburg  boldly  pronounced 
their  independence  in  advance  of  any  other  State, 
and  more  than  a  year  in  advance  of  the  United 
States."     A  recent  history  of  Mecklenburg  county 
claims  that  some  writers  "  have  not  noted  the  fact 
that  the  Declaration  of  May  20  declared  the  inde 
pendence  of  Mecklenburg  county,  and  that  the  Re 
solves  of  May  31  proclaimed  the  independence  of 
the  United  Colonies."  2     One  of  the  best  histories 
of  North  Carolina  says3  :   "  The  substance  of  the 
whole  controversy  touching  the  authenticity  of  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration  is  then,  after  all,  at  best 
but  frivolous.     If  they  did  not  renounce  the  King 
and  his  agents  on  May  2Oth,  they  certainly  did  on 
the  3 1 st."     Romulus  M.  Saunders,  a  diligent  inves 
tigator,  came  to  the  same  conclusion.     "  Such,  too," 
he  wrote  in  1852,*  "is  the  opinion  of  an  eminent 
American  author,  Jared  Sparks,  who  says  he  'does 
not  consider  the  point  (as  to  the  authenticity  of  the 
resolutions  of  the  2oth  May,)  as  of  much  importance, 
as  the  last  resolves  (3ist  May)  do  not  differ  much 
in   substance   and  spirit  from  the  other   paper.' ' 
George  Bancroft  describes  the  circumstances  attend 
ing  the  adoption  of  the  May  3ist  resolves,  apply 
ing  the  story  of  the  1 9th  and  2Oth  of  May  to  those 

1  Our  Living  and  Our  Dead,  i.,  426  (January,  1875). 

2  D.  A.  Tompkins :   History  of  Mecklenburg   County  and  the   City  of 
Charlotte  from  1740  to  JQOJ,  ii.,  8. 

3J.  W.  Moore:   History  of N.  C.,  i.,  189-190. 

4  Address  delivered  before  the  two  literary  societies  of  Wake  Forest  College, 
June  9,  1852,  by  Hon.  Romulus  M.  Saunders,  28-29. 


io8         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

resolves,  and  says,1  "  Thus  was  Mecklenburg  county 
in  North  Carolina  separated  from  the  British  Em 
pire,  .  .  ."  One  of  the  most  striking  illustra 
tions  of  misapprehension  as  to  the  import  of  the 
May  3ist  resolves  is  afforded  by  the  action  of 
public-spirited  citizens  of  Philadelphia,  who  pub 
lished  them  in  a  handsomely-printed  broadside  in 
1875,  in  commemoration  of  the  centennial  anniver 
sary  of  their  adoption,  as  "  The  First  Declaration  of 
American  Independence."  2  So  independent  inspirit 
are  these  resolves  that  the  advocates  of  the  document 
of  May  20th  have  long  contended  that  they  might 
well  have  followed  a  declaration  of  independence. 

We  have  seen  that  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  of 
May  3ist,  1775,  anticipated  the  advice  of  the  Con 
tinental  Congress  to  New  Hampshire  (November 
3,  1775),  South  Carolina  (November  4,  1775),  and 
Virginia  (December  4,  1775),  to  form  temporary 
local  governments.  Some  idea  of  how  Mecklen- 
burgers  regarded  their  precursive  step  during  the 
thirteen  months  before  July  4,  1776,  may  be  in 
ferred  from  public  opinion  concerning  this  advice 
at  the  time  it  was  given.  In  each  instance  Congress 
recommended  only  that  these  colonies  "establish 
such  a  form  of  government  as,  in  their  judgment, 
will  best  produce  the  happiness  of  the  people,  and 
most  effectually  secure  peace  and  good  order  in  the 
province,  during  the  continuance  of  the  present  dis 
pute  between  Great  Britain  and  the  colonies''' 3  But 

1  History  of  the  U.  S.,  vii.,  371. 

9  "  X  "  (Prof.  Charles  Phillips)  in  the  N.  Y.  Evening  Post,  May  19,  1875. 
8  Journals  of 'the  Continental  Congress,  iii.,  319,  326,  403. 


Origin  of  the  Myth  109 

the  formation  of  local  governments  was  looked  upon 
by  Whigs  and  Tories  as  equivalent  to  revolution  and 
a  step  towards  a  declaration  of  independence.1  It 
roused  into  activity  the  opponents  of  independence. 
Shortly  after  it  was  given  the  assemblies  of  Penn 
sylvania,  Maryland,  New  Jersey,  New  York,  and 
Delaware  instructed  their  delegates  in  the  Con 
tinental  Congress  to  oppose  independence.  "  We 
strictly  enjoin  you,"  said  the  Pennsylvania  Assembly 
(November  9,  1775),  "that  you,  in  behalf  of  this 
colony,  dissent  from  and  utterly  reject  any  proposi 
tions,  should  such  be  made,  that  may  cause  or  lead 
to  a  separation  from  our  mother  country  or  a  change 
of  the  form  of  this  government"  The  New  Jersey 
Assembly  used  nearly  the  same  language,  including 
the  phrase  respecting  a  change  in  the  form  of  the 
government  of  the  colony.2  When  the  advice  to 
form  a  temporary  local  government  reached  New 
Hampshire,  it  was  inferred  that  the  Continental 
Congress  was  in  favor  of  independence,  and  the 
delegates  from  the  town  of  Portsmouth  to  the  Pro 
vincial  Congress  of  New  Hampshire  were  instructed 
by  their  constituents  to  oppose  the  formation  of  a 
local  government  on  the  ground  that  it  would  fur 
nish  their  enemies  "  with  arguments  to  persuade 
the  good  people  there  that  we  are  aiming  at  in 
dependency,  which  we  totally  disavow."3  In  the 
Provincial  Congress  of  South  Carolina,  William 
Henry  Dray  ton,  the  president,  spoke  of  the  recom- 

1  Frothingham  :  Risf  of  the  Republic •,  448. 
*  Ibid.,  465-467. 
id.,  467,  493- 


no        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

mendation  of  the  Continental  Congress  as  "per 
mission  granted  to  colonies  to  erect  forms  of  gov. 
ernment  independent  of  and  in  opposition  to  the 
regal  authority."  Of  the  action  of  South  Carolina 
on  this  recommendation,  David  Ramsay,  an  eye 
witness,  wrote  :  "  The  formation  of  an  independent 
constitution  had  so  much  the  appearance  of  an 
eternal  separation  from  a  country  by  a  reconcilia 
tion  with  which  many  yet  hoped  for  a  return  of 
ancient  happiness,  that  a  great  part  of  the  Provin 
cial  Congress  opposed  the  measure.  The  Act  of 
Parliament  of  December  21,  throwing  the  colonies 
out  of  protection,  turned  the  scale."  l  In  Virginia 
also  the  advice  of  Congress  in  December,  1 775,  to 
form  a  government  was  regarded  as  being  in 
the  direction  of  independence,  if  not  independence 
itself,  and  was  not  immediately  acted  upon.2 

Since  intelligent  critics  of  our  own  day,  with  the 
document  itself  before  them,  have  interpreted  the 
May  3ist  resolves  as  a  declaration  of  independence  ; 
since  all  concede  that  it  was  such  in  effect,  and 
since  the  position  it  took  was  regarded  elsewhere 
in  1775  as  equivalent  to  independence,  it  is  easily 
understood  how  the  people  of  Mecklenburg  could 
believe,  after  the  colonies  had  formally  renounced 
allegiance  to  the  British  crown,  that  they  had  been 
the  first  to  take  that  step.  They  recalled  the  great 
fact  that  they  had  been  first  to  cut  loose  from 
dependence  on  the  mother  country,  and  not  the 
form  of  the  instrument  by  which  it  was  done. 

1  Frothingham  :  Rise  of  the  Republic,  494. 
9 Ibid.,  508. 


Origin  of  the  Myth 


in 


From  the  moment  that  they  declared  that  "the 
Provincial  Congress  of  each  province,  under  the 
direction  of  the  Great  Continental  Congress,  is  in 
vested  with  all  legislative  and  executive  powers 
within  their  respective  provinces ;  and  that  no 
other  legislative  or  executive  power  does,  or  can 
exist,  at  this  time,  in  any  of  these  colonies/'  British 
law  and  authority  ceased  forever  in  Mecklenburg 
county.  The  result  was  the  same  as  if  absolute 
independence  had  been  declared.  It  would,  indeed, 
have  been  remarkable  if  many  men  in  Mecklenburg 
who  were  not  particular  in  the  use  of  terms,  in 
cluding  some  members  of  the  committee  that 
adopted  them,  did  not  come  to  call  the  May  3ist 
resolves  a  declaration  of  independence.  The  pro 
visional  character  of  the  document  is  indicated  by 
little  more  than  a  brief  resolution  in  a  series  of 
twenty,  and  nearly  all  of  the  aged  witnesses  who 
testified  in  later  years  that  it  was  a  declaration  of 
independence  heard  it  read  but  once,  from  the  steps 
of  the  court-house.  If  Governor  Martin,  like  the 
writers  of  later  days,  failed  to  note  their  provisional 
character  in  1775,  we  mav  he  sure  that  many  men 
of  less  critical  acumen  in  Mecklenburg  failed  to 
remember  it  after  July  4,  1776.  Governor  Martin's 
public  denunciation  of  the  resolves  as  "most  traitor 
ously  declaring  the  entire  dissolution  of  the  laws, 
government,  and  constitution  of  this  country,  and 
setting  up  a  system  of  rule  and  regulation  repug 
nant  to  the  laws  and  subversive  of  his  Majesty's 
government,"  was  sufficient  in  itself  to  promote 
popular  misapprehension.  Another  potent  source 


ii2         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

of  error  was  the  knowledge  that  the  resolves  had 
been  too  far  in  advance  of  public  sentiment  to  re 
ceive  the  sanction  of  the  Continental  Congress,  a 
fact  which  was  remembered  years  afterwards  by 
men  who  forgot  nearly  all  other  details ;  for  many 
survivors  of  Revolutionary  days  erroneously  be 
lieved  in  later  years — as  even  John  Adams,  it  would 
seem,  believed  in  1819 — that  "the  genuine  sense 
of  America"  was  for  independence  as  early  as 
May,  1775.  Finally  there  entered  the  elements  of 
local  pride  and  patriotism  to  magnify  the  great 
event  of  1775. 

In  view  of  these  facts,  we  may  reasonably  pre 
sume  that  after  July  4,  1776,  the  May  3ist  resolves 
were  loosely  called  a  declaration  of  independence 
by  many  persons,  and  that  in  the  course  of  time,  as 
their  phraseology  and  terms  were  forgotten,  and 
the  number  of  their  surviving  authors  diminished, 
they  were  looked  back  upon  in  Mecklenburg  county 
generally,  and  to  some  extent  in  the  surrounding 
section  of  country,  as  a  formal  declaration  of  inde 
pendence.  In  the  light  of  our  study  of  the  records 
of  1775  in  their  relation  to  the  May  3ist  resolves, 
and  to  the  story  of  the  "  Mecklenburg  Declaration 
of  Independence,"  this  supposition  becomes  a  cer 
tainty.  But  demonstration  of  the  genesis  of  the 
myth  is  asked  for.  This  may  now  be  attained  in 
some  degree  with  the  aid  of  several  items  of  evi 
dence  dating  from  1777  an<^  onward,  which  the 
friends  of  the  declaration  of  May  20,  1775,  have 
lately  unearthed,  and  which  contain  what  they  re 
gard  as  explicit  references  to  that  document.  In 


Origin  of  the  Myth  113 

the  absence  of  such  records,  it  has  heretofore  been 
argued  with  much  force  that  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  was  never  heard  of  prior  to  its  publi 
cation  in  1819,  which  precipitated  the  century-old 
dispute.  The  newly-found  evidence  establishes 
the  fact  that,  as  early  as  1 783,  at  least,  persons  in 
Mecklenburg  county  and  the  vicinity  believed  that 
independence  was  declared  at  Charlotte  in  1775; 
but,  standing  by  itself,  it  gives  little  or  no  help  in 
determining  the  identity  of  the  declaration  referred 
to.  It  is  a  part  of  our  duty  to  show  only  that  if 
these  records  be  genuine  and  refer  to  one  of  the 
manifestoes  in  question,  the  references  would  as 
easily  or  more  aptly  apply  to  the  May  3ist  resolves 
as  to  the  alleged  declaration  of  independence. 

The  earliest  indication  of  a  declaration  of  inde 
pendence  by  Mecklenburg  county  is  contained  in  a 
poem  which  is  said  to  have  been  written  in  1777 
by  Adam  Brevard,  a  brother  of  Ephraim  Brevard, 
the  reputed  author  of  the  document  of  May  20,  1 775. 
The  original  manuscript  is  said  to  have  been  once 
in  the  possession  of  David  L.  Swain,  of  North 
Carolina,  who  wrote  to  George  Bancroft,  March  18, 
1858,  as  follows  r1 

"  There  is  no  document  which  fixes  with  certainty 
the  date  of  the  first  meeting  in  Mecklenburg,  nor 
with  the  exception  of  a  series  of  doggerel  verses, 
which  have  recently  come  into  my  possession,  is 
there  any  paper  containing  a  a  \szc\  direct  refer 
ence  to  the  subject,  which  I  suppose  to  be  of  earlier 
date  than  Sept.  1800.  .  .  .  The  poem  to  which  I 

1  From  the  original  letter  in  the  Bancroft  MSS.,  N.  Y.  Public  Library. 


ii4         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

refer  above,  bears  date  18  March  1777,  extends 
through  260  lines,  and  is  of  unquestionable  authen 
ticity.  It  opens  as  follows  : 

'  THE  MECKLENBURG  CENSOR 

'When  Mecklenburgs  fantastic  rabble 
Renowned  for  censure,  scold  and  gabble 
In  Charlotte  met  in  giddy  council 
To  lay  the  Constitutions  ground-sill 
By  choosing  men  both  learned  and  wise 
Who  clearly  could  with  half  shut  eyes 
See  mill-stones  through  or  spy  a  plot 
Whether  existed  such  or  not 
Who  always  could  at  noon  define 
Whether  the  sun  or  moon  did  shine 
And  by  philosophy  tell  whether 
It  was  dark  or  sunny  weather 
And  sometimes  when  their  wits  were  nice 
Could  well  distinguish  men  from  mice 
First  to  withdraw  from  British  trust 
In  Congress  they  the  very  first 
Their  independence  they  declared/ 


This  paper  was  lost,  we  believe,  when  Governor 
Swain's  collections  were  scattered  after  his  death 
in  1868.  We  have  found  no  further  mention  of  it 
in  his  correspondence  and  nothing  which  justifies 
the  belief  that  he  ever  had  the  original  poem  or  a 
genuine  copy  of  it  in  his  possession.  The  researches 
of  Mr.  A.  S.  Salley,  Jr.,  secretary  of  the  Histor 
ical  Commission  of  South  Carolina,  have  brought 
to  light  what  would  seem  to  be  conclusive  evidence 
that  the  last  three  lines  of  the  passage  quoted  above, 
which  refer  to  a  declaration  of  independence,  did 
not  belong  to  the  original  poem,  but  were  fraud 
ulently  added  by  some  early  advocate  of  the  au 
thenticity  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration.  In  an 


Origin  of  the  Myth  1 1 5 

article  contributed  to  the  Charleston  Sunday  News 
of  April,  22,  1906,  Mr.  Salley  reproduced  from  a 
manuscript  which  he  found  in  the  Charleston 
Library  an  apparently  full  copy  of  the  poem  and  an 
explanatory  preface  by  "  The  Editor,"  dated  March 
30,  1777,  with  which  it  was  first  published.  This 
copy  was  transcribed  and  annotated  in  1777,  by  a 
resident  of  Mecklenburg  county,  of  which  fact  the 
annotations  bear  indisputable  internal  evidence.  It 
is  entitled,  "  A  Modern  Poem  by  The  Mecklenburg 
Censor,  Published  A.  D.  1777,"  and  has  246  lines. 
The  first  fourteen  lines  differ  from  the  Swain  copy, 
in  several  particulars  of  verbiage,  and  the  poem 
does  not  contain  the  three  all-important  lines  which 
appear  next  in  order  in  the  Swain  copy,  or  anything 
that  can  be  construed  to  have  reference  to  events 
of  May,  1775.  The  poem  itself  and  the  contempo 
raneous  introduction  and  footnotes,  both  of  which 
evince  an  intimate  knowledge  of  men  and  events 
in  Mecklenburg  county  referred  to  by  "The  Censor," 
show  that  the  whole  semi-satirical  piece  dealt  with 
an  election  which  took  place  at  Charlotte  in  No 
vember,  1776,  and  that  the  three  lines  in  question 
do  not  consist  with  the  accompanying  text. 1 

Whether  or  not  the  poem  written  by  the  "  Meck 
lenburg  Censor,"  in  1777,  did  make  the   statement 

1  The  lines  of  the  poem  unearthed  by  Mr.  Salley  which  immediately 
follow  the  fourteenth  line  of  the  Swain  copy  are  : 

(i)  "  Squire  Subtle  then  to  Sulky  came, 
(a)  Sulky  a  lawyer  mean  in  fame. 

*  Sulky,'   he  said,  *my  friend,  pray  hear, 

'  I  've  things  important  for  your  ear. 

'  D  'ye  mark  yon  silly  rabble  rout? 


n6        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

that  independence  was  declared  in  Mecklenburg 
county,  it  could  not  invalidate  our  contention  that  all 
such  evidence  should  be  understood  as  relating  to 
the  resolves  of  May  31,  1775.  There  is  nothing  in 
the  passage  quoted  by  Governor  Swain  to  show  that 
it  had  reference  to  the  alleged  declaration  of  May 
20,  1775,  and  not  the  May  3ist  resolves.  But  we 
do  not  believe  that  the  myth  of  the  "  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  of  Independence  "  gained  so  strong  a 
foothold  as  early  as  1777  as  to  be  rendered  into 
verse  by  the  brother  of  the  author  of  the  May  3ist 
resolves. 

Into  the  assembly  now  they  rush'd, 

With  glowing  hopes  sublimely  flush'd, 

Where  Subtle  thus  harangued  the  crowd, " 

"The  Mecklenburg  Censor"  describes  the  course  pursued  by  Squire 
Subtle  (Hezekiah  Alexander)  and  Sulky  (Waightstill  Avery),  aided  by 
Quirk  (John  McKnitt  Alexander),  to  gain  election  to  the  Provincial  Congress 
by  the  "  fantastic  rabble  "  assembled  in  Charlotte,  and  concludes  with  advice 
to  his  countrymen  to  choose  better  representatives.  The  footnotes  are  a  key 
to  the  characters  and  the  action  of  the  piece,  and  refer  to  the  election  as 
having  taken  place  "last  November."  "The  Editor  "says  in  his  introduction, 
which  is  dated  March  30, 1777,  and  addressed  "To  Electors  of  Mecklenburg," 
that  the  poem  "  came  some  time  ago  by  accident"  into  his  hands.  "  The 
Censor,"  he  says,  "ridicules  the  confused  and  unthinking  conduct  of  the 
freemen  of  Mecklenburg  at  the  election  held  last  November  with  a  severity 
that  I  thought  unjustifiable,  until  I  saw  that  the  same  spirit  of  insipid  indif 
ference  prevailed  at  our  last  election,  held  the  loth  day  of  March."  The 
poem  was  therefore  in  his  hands  before  March  10,  1777,  and  the  Swain  copy, 
if  its  accredited  date  (March  18,  1777)  be  correct,  could  not  have  been  the 
original.  It  is  likely  that  the  Swain  paper  was  prepared  (by  a  man  of 
Swain's  time)  from  the  published  poem  of  246  lines  bearing  the  date  of 
March  30,  1777,  and  that  Swain,  when  writing  to  Bancroft  on  March  18, 
1858,  inadvertently  dated  the  passage  which  he  quoted  March  18,  1777, 
and  roughly  calculated  the  number  of  lines  in  the  piece  to  be  260.  He 
called  his  letter  a  "  very  hasty  and  almost  illegible  communication."  "  The 
Editor  "  of  "  A  Modern  Poem  "  goes  on  to  say  that  "  The  Censor  "  also  dis 
approves  of  the  men  chosen  to  represent  Mecklenburg  in  the  General 
Assembly,  and  that  the  "very  particular  instructions"  given  them,  "by  which 


Origin  of  the  Myth  117 

What  is  considered  by  the  Mecklenburg  claim 
ants  to  be  one  of  the  most  valuable  pieces  of  evi 
dence  of  the  supposed  declaration  of  independence 
was  discovered  in  September,  1904,  by  Mr.  O.  J. 
Lehman,  of  Bethania,  N.  C.  Among  the  archives 
of  the  Moravian  church  at  that  place — which  con 
tain  carefully-kept  records  written  in  German  script 
by  the  most  learned  men  of  the  Moravian  Brother 
hood,  covering  the  period  from  1755  to  the  present 
day — Mr.  Lehman  came  across  a  manuscript  of 
forty  pages,  in  pamphlet  form,  bearing  on  its  cover 
the  title : 

"  Bruchstueck,  |  Aufsaz  von  den  Vorkommenhei- 
ten  |  waehrend  dem  Revolutions-Kriege  |  welche 
einen  Bezug  |  auf  die  Wachau  )  hatten  |  bis  Ende 

1779." 

our  Representatives  must  abide  or  do  nothing,"  indicate  that  the  electors 
themselves  disapproved  of  their  choice.  From  these  remarks  and  from  the 
persons  mentioned  in  the  poem  as  having  been  elected  by  the  "  giddy 
council,"  it  is  clearly  evident  that  the  election  of  November,  1776,  which 
is  ridiculed,  took  place  immediately  before  the  instructions  to  the  delegates 
from  Mecklenburg  to  the  Provincial  Congress  of  November,  1776,  which 
are  printed  in  the  Colonial  Records  of  N.  C.  (vol.  x.,  p.  870  a),  were  agreed 
to  "At  a  general  Conference  of  the  inhabitants  of  Mecklenburg  assembled 
at  the  Court-house  on  the  first  of  November,  1776,  for  the  express  purpose 
of  drawing  up  instructions  for  the  present  Representatives  in  Congress." 
This  paper  begins:  "  You  are  chosen  by  the  inhabitants  of  this  county  to 
serve  them  in  Congress  or  General  Assembly  for  one  year  and  they  have 
agreed  to  the  following  Instructions  which  you  are  to  observe  with  the  strict 
est  regard."  The  instructions  contain  an  elaborate  outline  of  a  Constitu 
tion  and  Bill  of  Rights  for  the  new  state  of  North  Carolina.  We  conclude, 
therefore,  that  l<  When  Mecklenburg's  fantastic  rabble"  met  at  Charlotte, 

u  To  lay  the  Constitution's  ground-sill, 
By  choosing  men  most  learn'd  and  wise," 

they  assembled  to  choose  delegates  to  the  Provincial  Congress  which  met  at 
Halifax,  November  12,  1776,  and  formed  the  Constitution  of  North 


n8         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

This  English  translation  is  :  "  Fragment,  Record 
of  the  events  during  the  Revolutionary  War  which 
had  a  reference  to  Wachovia  to  the  end  of  1779." 

This  historical  sketch  opens  with  the  events  of 
the  year  1775,  and  the  chronicle  for  that  year  closes 
with  the  following  passage  : 

Ich  kan  zu  Ende  des  in$sten  Jahres  nicht  unangemerkt 
lassen,  dasz  schon  im  Sommer  selbigen  Jahres,  dasz  ist  im  May, 
Juny,  oder  July,  die  County  Mecklenburg  in  Nord  Carolina 

Carolina,  and  to  draw  up  instructions  for  those  delegates.  The  lines  which 
say  that  independence  was  declared  at  this  meeting  recite  a  falsehood. 

In  his  recent  book  on  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  (p.  30),  Dr.  George 
W.  Graham  claims  that  "The  genuineness  of  the  'Censor'  is  vouched  for  by 
Wheeler's  History  of  North  Carolina,  Lyman  Draper's  manuscript  in  the 
Thwait  Library,  and  Hon.  David  L.  Swain,  then  president  of  the  Univer 
sity  of  North  Carolina,  in  whose  possession  the  original  poem  was  at  the 
time  of  his  death  in  1868."  None  of  the  authorities  cited  by  Graham  have 
afforded  us  any  proof  of  the  genuineness  of  Swain's  copy  of  the  poem. 
Wheeler's  History  of  N.  C.  merely  says  (ii,  239)  that  Adam  Brevard  "wrote 
a  piece  called  the  '  Mecklenburg  Censor,'  full  of  wit  and  humor."  Draper's 
manuscript  work  against  the  authenticity  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration, 
(which  is  in  the  Library  of  the  State  Historical  Society  of  Wisconsin,  of 
which  Reuben  G.  Thwaites  is  secretary  and  superintendent)  contains  no 
stronger  foundation  for  Dr.  Graham's  assertions  than  a  copy  of  Swain's 
letter  of  March  1 8,  1857,  to  Bancroft,  from  which  we  have  quoted  the 
pertinent  passage.  Swain  does  not  say  in  this  letter  that  he  had  the  original 
poem  or  a  paper  in  the  handwriting  of  Adam  Brevard,  although  he  believed 
his  paper  to  be  "  authentic";  and  no  other  letter  of  his  that  refers  to  it  has 
ever  been  produced.  Brevard  was  a  schoolboy  at  Charlotte  in  the  autumn 
of  1776,  and  a  blacksmith  after  the  war.  Later  he  studied  law.  From 
this  and  from  his  narrative  in  Wheeler's  Reminiscences  of  N.  C.,  241-243, 
it  seems  doubtful  if  he  had  either  literary  ability  or  knowledge  of  the  times 
sufficient  to  have  enabled  him  to  write  the  poem. 

A  strange  fiction  about  Adam  Brevard  was  published  a  few  years  before 
this  poem  came  into  Swain's  hands.  Its  author  claimed  that  Adam  Brevard 
told  him  that  he  wrote  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  for  his  brother 
Ephraim,  and  took  the  Westminster  Confession  as  his  guide.  Later  he 
said  that  Adam  Brevard  wrote  it  as  the  amanuensis  of  his  brother.  See 
the  Presbyterian  Magazine,  Feb.,  1852,  ii,  75-76;  National  Intelligencer \ 
Nov.  6,  1857;  True  Witness  (New  Orleans),  May  26,  1860;  No.  Amer. 
Rev.,  Apr.,  1874  ;  Mag.  of  Amer.  Hist.,  xxi,  232. 


Origin  of  the  Myth  119 

sich  fuer  so  frey  u.  independent  von  England  declarirtc,  u. 
solche  Einrichtung  zur  Verwaltung  der  Geseze  unter  sich 
machte,  als  jamalen  der  Continental  Congress  hernach  ins 
Ganze  gethan.  Dieser  Congress  aber  sahe  dieses  Verfahren 
als  zu  fruehzeitig  an. 

The  italicised  words  are  written  in  English  script. 
The  English  translation  is  : 

I  cannot  leave  unmentioned  at  the  end  of  the  1 775th  year 
that  already  in  the  summer  of  this  year,  that  is  in  May,  June, 
or  July,  the  County  of  Mecklenburg  in  North  Carolina  declared 
itself  free  and  independent  of  England,  and  made  such  arrange 
ments  for  the  administration  of  the  laws  among  themselves,  as 
later  the  Continental  Congress  made  for  all.  This  Congress, 
however,  considered  these  proceedings  premature. 

The  date  and  authorship  of  this  paper,  which 
unfortunately  lacks  both  date  and  signature,  have 
been  established  by  Miss  Adelaide  L.  Fries,  of 
Winston-Salem,  N.  C.  In  an  article  published  in 
The  Wachovia  Moravian  vi  April,  1906,  Miss  Fries 
shows  that  the  record  was  written  at  Salem  in  the 
autumn  of  1 783  by  Traugott  Bagge,  a  merchant 
and  man  of  affairs  in  the  town  during  the  Revolu 
tionary  War.1 

Unfortunately  Traugott  Bagge  does  not  so  de 
scribe  the  declaration  to  which  he  refers  that  it  may 
be  readily  identified.  But  if  it  be  admitted  that  a  be 
lief  gained  currency  in  Mecklenburg  county  and  the 

1  Miss  Fries's  excellent  paper  was  also  published  in  the  Charlotte  Observer 
of  April  15,  1906.  The  material  parts  were  reprinted  in  the  North  Amer 
ican  Review  for  July,  1906.  Facsimile  reproductions  of  the  Moravian 
record  will  be  found  in  Harper's  Weekly  for  July  7,  1906  (L,  No.  2585), 
and  in  the  Charlotte  Daily  Observer  of  December  18,  1905,  and  May  20, 
1906. 


i2o        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

vicinity  as  early  as  1783  that  the  May  3ist  resolves 
were  a  declaration  of  independence,  his  recollec 
tions  must  be  understood  as  relating  to  them. 
After  a  lapse  of  eight  years  he  could  not  say  with 
certainty  in  what  month  the  declaration  to  which 
he  referred  was  made,  and  did  not  recollect  that  in 
spirit  and  in  form  it  bore  a  striking  resemblance  to 
the  then  well-known  Declaration  of  July  4,  1776. 
The  one  significant  fact  which  was  impressed  upon 
his  memory  was  that,  after  declaring  independence, 
Mecklenburg  county  "  made  such  arrangements 
for  the  administration  of  the  laws  among  them 
selves  as  later  the  Continental  Congress  made  for 
all,"  and  that  the  Continental  Congress  then  "  con 
sidered  these  proceedings  premature."  The  only 
measures  taken  by  the  Continental  Congress  before 
July  4,  1776,  respecting  "  administration  of  the 
laws  "  in  the  colonies  were  the  recommendations  to 
form  local  governments  given  to  New  Hampshire, 
South  Carolina,  and  Virginia,  anticipated  by  the 
May  3ist  resolves,  and  the  resolution  of  May  15, 
1776,  which  "  recommended  to  the  respective  as 
semblies  and  conventions  of  the  United  Colonies, 
where  no  government  sufficient  to  the  exigencies 
of  their  affairs  have  been  hitherto  established,  to 
adopt  such  government  as  shall,  in  the  opinion  of 
the  representatives  of  the  people,  best  conduce  to 
the  happiness  and  safety  of  their  constituents 
in  particular,  and  America  in  general."  *  The 
May  3ist  resolves  took  substantially  the  position 
of  the  Continental  Congress  on  May  15,  1776. 

1  Journals  of  the  Continental  Congress,  iv.,  342,  357-358. 


Origin  of  the  Myth  121 

When  Mecklenburg  proposed  it  a  year  before, 
"Congress  considered  these  proceedings  premature." 
There  are  a  few  old  deeds  on  file  in  the  court 
house  in  Charlotte  which  have  been  adduced  as 
evidence  that  Mecklenburg  declared  independence 
in  1775.  They  were  recorded  during  and  imme 
diately  after  the  Revolutionary  War,  when  it  was 
customary  to  recite  the  date  of  the  execution  of 
deeds  from  "  American  Independence,"  or  from 
"  the  independence  of  America,"  similar  to  the 
former  custom  of  dating  them  "  in  the  reign 
of  George  the  Third."  Three  deeds  are  in 
Charlotte  which  seem  to  reckon  the  time  of  "  our 
independence"  from  1775,  and  one  which  dates 
"the  independence  of  the  State  of  North  Caro 
lina  "  from  the  same  year.  The  earliest  of  these 
four,  which  are  cited  in  Dr.  George  W.  Graham's 
work  on  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration,1  reads : 
"This  indenture  made  this  I3th  day  of  February, 
1779,  and  in  the  fourth  year  of  our  independence." 
A  few  persons  of  strong  local  pride  may  have  dated 
their  deeds  from  what  they  remembered  as  Meck 
lenburg's  declaration  of  independence,  but  this 
would  have  been  likely  to  excite  doubts  in  other 
counties  or  in  other  states  as  to  whether  they  were 
correctly  dated.  Moreover,  even  in  the  adjoining 
county  of  Rowan,  Traugott  Bagge,  a  merchant 
and  man  of  affairs,  did  not  know  the  exact  date  of 
the  supposed  declaration.  The  apparent  reference 
to  that  declaration  is  probably  nothing  more  than 
the  result  of  error  in  calculating  the  time  from 

1  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  31-32. 


122         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

July  4,  1776;  or  perhaps  the  first  year  of  inde 
pendence  was  regarded  as  ending  on  the  last  day  of 
the  year  1776.  Mr.  A.  S.  Salley,  Jr.,  of  Columbia, 
S.  C.,  has  unearthed  several  indentures  of  this 
period,  made  in  South  Carolina,  which  are  dated 
one  year  too  many  from,  or  one  year  too  short  of, 
July  4,  1776.  He  quotes  the  opinion  of  an  emi 
nent  lawyer  to  the  effect  that  the  matter  is  "un 
worthy  of  the  notice  of  any  historical  student." *  At 
all  events,  we  are  willing  to  treat  them  as  evidence  of 
a  growing  belief  that  the  May  3ist  resolves  consti 
tuted  a  declaration  of  independence. 

We  have  considered  all  the  evidence,  of  an  earl 
ier  date  than  1800,  of  Mecklenburg's  "  Declaration 
of  Independence  "  which  researches  extending  over 
nearly  a  century  have  thus  far  brought  to  light. 
There  is  no  evidence  before  1800  which  confirms 
the  alleged  date  of  the  transaction — May  20,  1775. 
Dr.  George  W.  Graham  argues  that  the  date  is  de 
termined  by  the  following  circumstance  2  :  "  On 
May  20,  1787,  the  twelfth  anniversary  of  the  meet 
ing  at  Charlotte,  there  was  born  to  Major  John 
Davidson,  one  of  the  signers,  a  son,  Benjamin 
Wilson.  And  in  honor  of  the  Mecklenburg  Dec 
laration  Benjamin  was  called  by  his  father  *  My 
Independence  Boy, '  and  to  distinguish  his  identity 
in  a  county  abounding  in  *  Davidsons '  was  known 
among  the  neighbors  as  '  Independence  Ben. '  For 
this  fact  we  are  indepted  to  Mr.  Robert  F.,  aged 
seventy-five,  and  Dr.  Joseph,  aged  sixty-eight  years 

'Charleston,  S.  C.,  Sunday  News,  July  8,  1906, 
8   The  Mecklenburg  Declaration.,  35-36. 


Origin  of  the  Myth  123 

sons  of  Benjamin  Wilson  Davidson,  who  now  reside 
in  Charlotte  and  are  men  of  the  highest  integrity. 
Ben  Davidson  died  when  about  forty-five  years  of 
age  and  is  buried  in  Hopewell  Cemetery,  where 
his  tombstone  now  [1895]  stands  with  the  date  of  his 
birth,  May  20,  1787,  inscribed  upon  it."  Dr.  Graham 
seems  to  overlook  the  fact  that  Messrs.  Robert  F. 
and  Dr.  Joseph  Davidson  do  not  say  that  their 
father  received  the  sobriquets  of  "  My  Indepen 
dence  Boy"  and  "  Independence  Ben  "  before  1800, 
or  even  before  1819,  when  the  date  of  May  2oth 
received  much  publicity.  Their  statement  is  of  no 
significance  whatever  unless  this  was  their  meaning. 
Ben  Davidson  was  certainly  considerably  over  thir 
teen  years  of  age  when  his  father  began  to  call  him 
"  My  Independence  Boy,  "  for  as  late  as  1830,  when 
Major  John  Davidson  was  requested  to  state  what 
he  recollected  about  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration 
meeting,  which  he  had  attended  as  a  member,  the 
date  of  his  son's  birth  was  not  associated  in  his  mind 
with  the  date  of  that  meeting.  As  to  the  date  of 
the  meeting  he  could  only  say  :  "  I  am  confident 
that  the  Declaration  of  Independence  by  the 
people  of  Mecklenburg  was  made  public  at  least 
twelve  months  before  that  of  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States." *  The  Mecklenburg  resolutions 
were  adopted  more  than  thirteen  months  before 
July  4,  1776. 

Having  shown  that  the  growth  of  the  myth  of 
the  "  Mecklenburg  Declaration   of  Independence" 

1  John  Davidson  to  Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander,    October  5,    1830, 
State  Pamphlet,  Appendix. 


124        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

was  likely,  if  not  inevitable,  and  that  all  evidence 
of  an  earlier  date  than  1800  which  is  cited  in  support 
of  the  authenticity  of  the  paper  of  May  20,  1775, 
applies  as  easily  or  more  aptly  to  the  paper  of 
May  31,  1775,  we  pass  to  the  earliest  known 
evidence  of  the  alleged  declaration  of  indepen 
dence. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE    DAVIE    COPY 

ON  April  6,  1800,  the  records  of  the  Mecklen 
burg  Committee  of  Safety  were  burned  with  the 
dwelling  of  John  McKnitt  Alexander,  in  Mecklen 
burg  county.  Alexander  had  been  a  member  of 
the  committee,  a  representative  from  Mecklenburg 
in  the  Provincial  Congresses  of  August  and  Sep 
tember,  1775,  and  of  April,  1776,  and  an  active 
patriot  during  the  Revolutionary  War.  He  was 
sixty-seven  years  of  age  in  1800.  At  the  suggestion, 
perhaps,  of  some  of  his  old  friends  in  Mecklenburg, 
or  because  he  felt  it  incumbent  upon  himself,  as 
the  last  custodian  of  the  records,  to  preserve  some 
memento  of  the  deeds  of  his  compatriots  of  "'75  " 
he  reduced  to  writing  his  recollections  of  them  at 
some  time  during  the  five  months  succeeding  the 
destruction  of  the  records.  His  manuscript  was 
found  in  a  mutilated  condition,  shortly  after  his 
death  in  1817,  by  his  son,  Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt 
Alexander.  It  was  accompanied  by  a  paper  in  an 
unknown  handwriting  which  contained  the  same 
resolutions  and  historical  note,  with  a  few  text 
ual  variations,  as  were  published  in  the  Raleigh 
Register  of  April  30,  1819.  In  a  certificate  to  these 

125 


i26        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

documents,  which  were  submitted  to  the  committee 
appointed  by  the  Legislature  of  North  Carolina  in 
1830  to  examine  the  documentary  proofs  of  the 
authenticity  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  Dr. 
Alexander  stated  that  he  had  "  always  taken  "  from 
the  paper  in  an  unknown  handwriting,  which  was 
entire,  where  portions  of  the  paper  written  by  his 
father  were  lost ;  meaning,  without  doubt,  that  he 
prepared  from  them  the  paper  published  in  1819. 

John  McKnitt  Alexander's  manuscript  is  here 
reproduced  from  a  copy  made  during  the  fifties  for 
George  Bancroft,  the  historian,  which  is  now  among 
the  Bancroft  manuscripts  in  the  New  York  Public 
Library.  Care  was  taken  by  the  copyist,  as  will 
be  seen  from  the  facsimile  of  his  manuscript,  to 
reproduce  every  line  and  letter  as  it  appeared  in 
the  original ;  and  he  imitated  the  handwriting  in 
several  places.  He  copied  as  follows  :J 

1775 

On  the  19*  May  1775  ["6"  was  written  through 
"5"]  Pursuant  to  the   Order  of   Col?  Tho?  Polk2 
to  each  Captain  of  Militia  in  his  reigment  of  Meek-  sic 
lenburg   County,    to   elect  nominate  and  appoint  2 
persons   of   their   Militia  company,    cloathed    with 
ample   powers  to  devise  ways  &  means  to  extricate 
themselves   and   ward   off   the   dreadfull  impending 
storm  bursting  on  them  by  the  British  Nation  &*:  &' 

Therefore   on  s*  19^  May  the  s*  Committee  met 
sic  in   Charlotte   Town    (2  men    from  each    company) 

1  The  italicised  portions  are  notes  in  pencil  by  the  copyist. 

Tho.  Polk 

2  In  the  original  it  is  written  thus :  Col.  'Adam  AlcAdnder. 


tm/  few  fri^&imi^C  *sr  -LS  Mtlt'&i'H sffu<« 


Bancroft's  copy  of  the  "  torn  half  sheet"  in  John  McKnitt  Alexander's  handwriting  from 
which  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  was  constructed. 


n,t-/^<^'  '{•/• 
V   U/      i/ 


(TUAJ 


/ktruleb 


Lt4j  '  tif 


t'i/twon'r    M/v  firt/ 


^  $i>0d-  Us&b}  ^4Ztufa*j  0Fn££M  irv  J  •  Unt*  t 

)  /u.J 


yl— 

if  </• 


y& 


>-# 


' 


The  Davie  Copy 


or  conceived  they  had 
sic  Vested  with  all  powers  these  their  constituents  had^&f 

about 

sic  After  a  short  conferance  ^~e-£  their  suffering 
brethren  beseiged  and  suffering  every  hardship  in 
Boston  and  the  American  Blood  running  in  Lexing- 

fire 
sic  ton  &.c  the   Electrical^flew  into  every  breast  and  to 

Esquire 
sic  preserve  order-^aad  Choose  Abraham  Alex^  chairman 

Secretary  a  few 

&  J.  MCK.  A.  After^about^n  Hour  free  discussion 
in  order  to  give  relief  to  suffering  America  and  protect 
our  Just  &  natural  right 

Is*     We  (the  County)   by  a   Solemn    and     awfull 

abjured 
vote,  Dissolved  our  allegiance  to  King  George  &  the 

British  Nation. 

2d.  Declared  our  selves  a  free  &  independent  people, 

having  a  right  and  capable  to  govern  ourselves  (as 

a  part  of  North  Carolina) 

3*?  In  order  to  have  laws  as  a  rule   of  life — for  our 
sic  future  Government  We  forme4  a  Code  of  laws,  by 

adopting  our  former  wholesome  laws, 
then 

4^     And  as  there  was^no  officers  civil  or  Millitary 

in  our  County 

We  Decreed  that  every  Millitia  officer  in  s*  County 

should  hold  and  occupy  his  former  commission  and 

Grade 

And  that  every  member  present,  of  this  Committee 

shall  henceforth  [torn]  as  a  Justice  of  the  Peace  (in 
The  original  the)  Character  of  a  Committee  M 
is  torn  here     hear  and  determine  all  Controversies  agree- 
at  all  the      able  to  s^  laws—  peace  Union 

blanks.        &     harmony    in    s^    County — and    to    use 

every  spread  the  Electrial  fire  of  free 

dom  among  ourselves  &  u 


128         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

the 

sic       5*     A4-&*:  &*i  many  other  laws  &  ordinances  were 
then  ma  after   sitting   up    in   the 

Court  house  all  night — neither 

After  reading  and   maturing  every  paragraph  every-  sic 
sic  par-  they  were  all  passed  Nem-Con  about  12  o'clock 
May  20.  *&o-  1775  l 

But  in   a  few  days  (after  cooling)  a  considerable 

part  of  sd.    Committee  Men  conveened  and  employed 

Capt"  James  Jack   (of  Charlotte)    to  go  express  to 

Congress   (then  in  Philadelphia)  with  a  Copy  of  all 

resolutions  and 

sd>NLaws  &•  and  a  letter  to  our  ^members  there,  sic 

W1? 
sic  Rich?  Caswell,^  Joseph  Hooper  &  Joseph  Hughes  in  sic 

order  to  get  Congress  to  sanction  or  approve   them 

&<:&<: 

Capt*  Jack  returned  with  a  long,  full,  complasent 

letter  from  s*?  3  members,   recommending   our  zeal 
sic  recommending  perseverance  order  &  forbearance  &c. 

— (We  were  premature)  Congress  never  had    our  s*? 

laws   on  their  table  for  discussion,    though  s?  Copy 

was  left  with  them  by  Capt"  Jack. 


sic       N.  B:    about    1785   ["5"   was  changed  to  "7"] 
tf44-Doctor    Hugh  Williamson  (then  of  New  York  ; 
but    formerly  was   member  of  Congress    from   this 
The  original  state)  applied 

is  here       above    by    Col°.   Wm   Polk,   who  was  then 
torn          compiling  a 
in  order  to  prove  that  the  American  people 

in    the     Revolution    and   that   Congress 
were  com 


This  is  written  so  in  the  original. 


'^OC^^^^T^-^^Jj^jjO 

TT~      j  4uT7 


'  /,'    ''/>  A  //  /   $         //         /  '/^ 

/    /       .   y///  ,/X//>xr,4<,' 

7 


V 

/, 


/if  ;  /v/.'  fu-tejiffj  tff  s/uj  fa  <*••'•  •  i 


taj  urou       >  /,,• 

fhU  'tnr 


fkt/>£f{  ,  //  (,'tf.  •( 

;/  /A£-'  t^^H^A.-/  a.-^iriUA^'i^,'  tf^x^r/^/V^/tX^^ 
L&U/rr  if      (Al<O-1i-<  'i  V.   -    -  •Ujft.-cC.-A'  f/f/f'*r<'(-lf..<?<-l.t/-<'t'!'!l<>('<'rn  '•  /?  infn  <  ,/ 


vSffQfW  -^ 


d'f  ////  •tif/Lt-i'O  viAAJ  'fiAsfr*  £^yi-/r(</ 

//x  ^ 


The  Davie  Copy  129 

N.    B.  allowing  the  19^  May  to   be   a   rash  Act 
The  original      effects  in  binding  all  the  middle  *  west 
is  here  firm  whigs — no  torys  but 

torn.  not  fully  represented  in  the  first 

2d page 

Be  it  remembered.  That  the  within  mentioned 
Committee  Men  continued  to  act  as  Justices  and 

or  tollerated  to  act 
were    confirmed^  in  their  offices  by  the  Counsel  of     sit 

then  sitting 

Safety  in  Newbern  &  Wilmington  alternately  about 
T77  [not  legible}  and  continued  to  hold  their  quarterly 
Sessions  in  Charlotte  as  usual  andTio  appeals  from  no 
s?  Justices — for  they  had  the  confidence  of  the  peo 
ple  and  such  was  the  Enthusiism  of  the  people  at  sic 
large  "that  whatever  was  the  voice  of  the  People 
was  the  voice  of  God "  all  was  submission.  Thus 
matters  were  carried  on  when  lord  Cornwallis  was 
in  Charlotte  in  the  fall  of  1780 — "  He  was  in  a 
Hornets-nest "  no  communications  to,  or  from  but 
the  great  Cambden  road — all  firm  whigs —  but  s? 
[not  legible}  and  they  dare  not  move  nor  Cheap.  sit 

or   2d. 

And  the  first  Court  held  in  Charlotte  after 
lord  Cornwallis  retreated  retrograded  or  run  away 
from  Charlotte,  the  Court  adjourned  or  rather  ap 
pointed  a  Special  Court  of  Enquiry — which  set  by 
regular  adjournments  at  Charlotte — at  Col?  James 
Harris — at  Col?  Phifers  one  week  at  each  place — to 
which  places  all  suspicious  persons  were  brought 

under   Guard — formally    tried — some  from   Lincoln 

and 

&  Rowan  Countys — &  even  Booth^ — Dunn  (lawyers) 

from  Salisbury  were  convicted  and  ordered  off  under 

Guard  with  several  others — 

sic        These  severe   just — tho  arbitary    measures  were 
sic    the  cause  of  peace  [torn}  the  County  untill  ^fttly— 4 

9 


130        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

if*-  the  fall  of  1777  when  our  first     [torn]     embly 
met  in  Newbern  in  the  State  of  North  Carolina  and 

nearly  all  that  was  done 
confirmed  [torn]  proved  ^  all  we  had  done.    New  State  sic 

commissions  then  issued  &'    [torn]     fficers  as  they 
yet  do — see  the  laws  of  s?  session  of  1777. 

[torn]  &  foregoing  extracted  from  the  old 

minutes  &? 

By  J  MK  Alexander 

[torn]  ch  were  the  feeling  and  sympathiteck  sensations  sic 
of  the  Mecklenburgers,  when  they  knew  their  brethren 
of  Boston  were  beseiged  by  General  Gage  &  in  a  state 
of  Starvation,  that  in  each  Capt?  Militia  company  a 
subscription  was  signed  for  their  relief — many  sub 
scribed  one  Bullock — other  2  Joined  for  one  Bullock 
— and  none  was  suffered  to  sign  but  what  the  officers 
sic  and  leading  men  admited,  &  for  whom  they  were 

responsible  &?     And  had  there  been  a  plan  of  gover-    sic 
ment  for  their  driving  to  Boston,  100  would  have 
been  given  in  the  county  in  one  week — the  next  news 
we  heard — Boston  had  got  relief — We  were  thanked 
for  our  goodwill — 

And  soon  afterwards  we  smelt  and  felt  the  Blood 

&  carnage  of  Lexington  which  raised  all  the  pas- 

sic    sions  into    fury — which  was  and  revenge  which  was 

j/V    the  immediate  cause  of  abjuring  Great  britain  on  May 

19.   *8  1775. 
April  19.  1775.  wa   the  battle  at  Lexington 


The  rest  is  torn  off. 

The  person  who  copied  the  foregoing  manuscript 
stated  that  it  was  "  sewed  up  in  a  sheet  of  paper  on 
which  was  written  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of 
Independence  as  printed  in  the  Raleigh  Register  of 


'  ' 


ca 


i&&S'   jfajfou 


The  Davie  Copy  I31 

April  30,  1819,"  but  with  a  few  variations.  In 
the  paper  reproduced  in  the  accompanying  facsim 
ile  he  copied  these  variations  and  all  corrections, 
erasures,  etc.,  in  the  original  manuscript,  and  noted 
their  place  by  the  number  of  the  line  of  the  corre 
sponding  portion  of  the  Raleigh  Register  document 
as  reprinted  in  the  State  Pamphlet.  Reconstructed 
from  the  copyist's  notes  and  the  State  Pamphlet, 
the  manuscript  in  an  unknown  handwriting,  to  which 
John  McKnitt  Alexander's  was  attached,  is  as 
follows : 

N?  Carolina  Mecklenberg  County.     Declaration   of   Inde 
pendence   May    20.    I775.1 

In  the  spring  of  1775,  the  leading  characters  of  Mecklen 
burg  county,  stimulated  by  that  enthusiastic  ardour  patriotism 
which  elevates  the  mind  above  considerations  of  individual 
agrandisement,  and  scorning  to  shelter  themselves  from  the  im 
pending  storm  by  submission  to  lawless  power,  &c.  &c.  held 
several  detached  meetings,  in  each  of  which  the  individual 
sentiments  were,  "  that  the  cause  of  Boston  was  the  cause 
of  all  ;  that  their  destinies  were  indissolubly-ftxed  connected 
with  those  of  their  Eastern  fellow-citizens — and  that  they 
must  either  submit  to  all  the  impositions  which  an  unprincipled, 
and  to  them  an  unrepresented,  Parliament  might  impose 
— or  support  their  brethren  who  were  doomed  to  sustain  the 
first  shock  of  that  power,  which,  if  successful  there,  would 
ultimately  overwhelm  all^kh  in  the  common  calamity."  Con 
formably  to  these  principles  it  was  Coln.  Adam  Alexander^ 
[  "  Thos.  Polk "  written  through  "  Adam  Alexander  "] 
thr°.  solicitation 
wao  authorise4  to  issued  an  order  to  each  Captain's  company 

comprising 

in  the  county  of  Mecklenburg,  (then  embracing  the  present 
county  of  Cabarrus,)  directing  each  militia  company  to  elect 

1  This  title  was  in  a  different  handwriting. 


i32        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

&-«  persons,  and  delegate  to  them  ample  powers  to  devise 
ways  and  means  to  aid  and  assist  their  suffering  brethren  in 
Boston,  and  also  generally  to  adopt  measures  to  extricate 
themselves  from  the  impending  storm,  and  to  secure  un 
impaired  their  inaliable  rights,  privileges  and  liberties,  from 
the  dominant  grasp  of  British  imposition  and  tryanny. 
In  conformity  to  said  order,  on  the  igth  of  May,  1775,  the 

town  «^fl 

said  delegation  met  in  1  Charlotte  ^  vested  with  unlimited 
powers ;  at  which  time  official  news,  by  express,  arrived 
of  the  battle  of  Lexington  on  that  day  of  the  prericeding 
month.  Every  delegate  felt  the  value  and  importance  of 
the  prize,  and  the  awfull  and  solemn  crisis  which  had  arrived — 
every  bosom  swelled  with  indignation  at  the  malice,  inveteracy, 
and  insatiable  revenge,  developed  in  the  late  attact  at  Lex 
ington.  The  universal  sentiment  was  :  let  us  not  flatter 
ourselves  that  popular  harangues,  or  resolves ;  that  popular 
vapour  will  avert  the  storm,  or  vanquish  our  common  enemy 
— let  us  deliberate — let  us  calculate  the  issue — the  probable 
result ;  and  then  let  us  act  with  energy,  as  brethren  leagued  to 
preserve  our  property — our  lives — and  what  is  still  more  en 
dearing,  the  liberties  of  America.  Abraham  Alexander  was 
then  elected  Chairman,  and  John  McKnitt  Alexander,  Clerk. 
After  a  free  and  full  discussion  of  the  various  objects  for 
which  the  delegation  had  been  convened,  it  was  unanimously 
ordained — 

1  That  whosoever  directly  or  indirectly  abetted,  or  in  any 
way,    form,  or   manner,    countenanced  the  unchartered   and 
dangerous  invasion  of  our  rights,  as  claimed  by  G.  britain  is 
an  enemy  to  this   County — to  America — and  to  the  inherent 
and  inaliable  rights  of  man. 

do 

2  We   the   Citizens  of  Mecklenburg   County   are~  hereby 
de  the 

absolved  -from  political  bands  which  have  connected  us  to  the 

1  Note  in  the  margin:  "  *  town*  Is  the  handwriting  of  Jn?  Mc  K*  Alex 
ander. 

"  J.  M=  Knitt." 


(0 


<y          A&l 


: 


•  y/ 

,,  JSo       /• 

,  Jf        'f. 

.  3? 


The  Bancroft  copyist's  description  of  the  "  sheet"  in  an   "  unknown  handwriting"  from 
which  the  publication  of  1819  was  copied. 


'i     #/> 

4 


'A^>  LjfMsyttss   frAt?  h£/t£&t/) 


'& 


i*->   a.s£.-nwt)  tAStt^o,*/  /£,&  f-c. 


C 

/ 


„    Jj 


j£ 

j7 

c// 


"  ^ 


/     •}   ,    / 
a     </  •  ft  *<.*,& 

' 


. 
trt^  *-f~" 


The  Davie  Copy  133 

Mother  Country,  and  hereby  absolve  ourselves  from  all  alle 
giance  to  the  British  Crown,  and  abjure  all  political  connection, 

association 

contract,  or  dependence  with  that  nation,  who  have  wantonly 
trampled  on  our  rights  and  liberties — and  inhumanly  shed  the 
innocent  blood  of  American  patriots  at  Lexington. 

3  We  do  hereby  declare  ourselves  a  free   and  independent 
people,  are,  and  of  right  ought  to  be,  a  sovereign  and  self-gov 
erning  Association,  under  the  control  of  no  power  other  than 
that  of  our  God  and  the  General  Government  of  the  gen  con 
gress  to  the  maintainance  of  which  independance  civil   &  re 
ligious  we  solemnly  pledge  to  each  other,  our  mutual  co-opera 
tion,  our  lives,  our  fortunes,  and  our  most  sacred  honor. 

4  As  we  now  acknowledge  the  existance  &  controul  of  no 
law  or  legal  officer,  civil  or  military,  within  this  county,    we 
do  hereby  ordain  and  adopt,  as  a  rule  of  life,  all,  each  and 
every  of  our  former  laws,  wherein,  nevertheless,  the  Crown  of 

never  can 

great  britain  nevertheless  can  &  ought  be  considered  as  hold 
ing  rights,  privileges,  immunities,  or  authority  therein. 

5  It  is  also  further  decreed,  that  all,  each  and   every  mili 
tary  officer  in  this  county,  is  hereby  reinstated   to  his  former 
command  and  authority,  he  acting  conformably  to  these  reg 
ulations.     And  that  every  member  present  of  this  delegation 

be  civil  officer-ox  viz  as, 

shall  henceforth  act-as.^  a  Justice  of  the  Peace,  in  the  character 
of  a  ''Committee-man,  "  to  hear  issue  process,  hear  and 
determine  all  matters  of  controversy,  according  to  said 
adopted  laws,  and  to  preserve  peace,  and  union,  and  harmony, 
in  said  county, — and  to  use  every  exertion  to  spread  the  love 
of  country  and  fire  of  freedom  throughout  America,  until  a 
more  general  and  organized  government  be  established  in  this 
State  province. 

shall 

A  selection  from  the  members  present  w«g  constituted  a 
Committee  of  public  safety  for  s?  County. 

A  number  of  bye  laws  were  also  added,  merely  to  protect 
the  association  from  confusion,  and  to  regulate  their  general 
conduct  as  citizens.  After  setting  up  in  the  Court  House  all 


134        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

night  neither  sleepy  hungry  or  fatigued — and  after  discussing 
every  paragraph,  they  were  all  passed,  sanctioned,  and  de- 

unanimously 
creed   ncm   con   about    re  o'Clock^  May    20^  *     In  a   few 

deputation  convened 

days  a  second  meeting  of  s?  delegation  of  took  place,  when 
Capt.  James  Jack,  of  Charlotte,  was  deputed  as  express  to 
Congress  in  Philadelphia,  with  a  copy  of  said  Resolves  and 
Proceedings,  together  with  a  letter  addressed  to  our  three  re 
presentatives  there,  viz.  Richard  Caswell,  W?  Jar-Hooper 
and  Joseph  Hughes — under  express  injunctions,  personally, 
&  thro*  the  s^  State  representation,  to  use  all  possible  means 
to  have  said  proceedings  sanctioned  and  approved  by  the 
General  Congress.  On  the  return  of  Captain  Jack,  the  dele 
gation  learned  that  their  proceedings  were  individually  ap 
proved  by  the  Members  of  Congress,  but  that  it  was  deemed 
premature  to  lay  them  before  the  house  those  a  joint  letter 
from  said  three  members  of  Congress  was  also  received, 
complimentary  of  the  zeal  in  the  common  cause,  and  recom 
mending  perseverance,  order  and  energy. 

The  subsequent  harmony,  unanimity,  and  exertion  in  the 
cause  of  liberty  and  independence,  evidently  resulting  from 
these  regulations,  and  the  continued  exertion  of  said  delega 
tion,  apparently  tranquilised  this  section  of  the  State,  and  met 
with  the  concurrence  and  high  approbation  of  the  Council  of 
Safety,  who  held  their  sessions  at  Newbern  and  Wilmington, 
alternately,  and  who  confirmed  the  nomination  and  acts  of 
the  delegation  in  their  official  capacity. 

From  this  delegation  originated  the  Court  of  Enquiry  of 
this  county,  who  constituted  and  held  their  first  session  ^  im— 
soon  after  in  Charlotte     removed  from 
mediately   on  Lord  Cornwallis  leaving  Charlotte  in  the  year 

then 

1780 — they  held  their  meetings  regularly  at  Charlotte,  at  Col. 
James  Harris's,  and  at  Col.  Phifer's,  alternately,  one  week  at 

civil 

each  place.  It  was  a  military  court  founded  on  military 
process.  Before  this  Judicature,  all  suspicious  persons  were 

1  Over  the  caret  the  original  manuscript  was  scratched  into  a  hole. 


/  4 

OseH;   J. 


. 

J  AJ  •3&*4,6t,f&k''t.>**t 


/ 


The  Davie  Copy  135 

made  to  appear,  were  formally  tried  and  banished,  or  con 
tinued  under  guard.  Its  jurisdiction  was  as  unlimited  as 
toryism,  and  its  decrees  as  final  as  the  confidence  and  patriotism 
of  the  county.  Several  were  arrested  and  brought  before 
them  from  Lincoln,  Rowan  and  the  adjacent  counties — Booth 
&  Dunn  (lawyers)  were  brot  from  Salisbury — tryed  convicted 
— proscribed — &  banished  &*:  &*: 

The  "  sheet"  in  an  unknown  handwriting  and  the 
mutilated  "  half  sheet"  written  by  John  McKnitt 
Alexander  were  thus  certified  by  his  son : 

No.  Carolina,  ) 

Mecklenburg  County.  ) 

The  sheet  and  torn  half  sheet  to  which  this  is  attached  (the 
sheet  is  evidently  corrected  in  two  places  by  John  McKnitt 
Alexander  as  marked  on  it  2^"  — the  half  sheet  is  in  his  own 
handwriting)  were  found  after  the  death  of  Jno.  McKnitt 
Alexander  in  his  old  mansion  house  in  the  centre  of  a  roll  of 
old  pamphlets,  viz.  :  "  an  address  on  public  liberty  printed 
Philadelphia,  1774  ;  "  one  "on  the  Disputes  with  G.  Britain, 
printed  1775  "  ;  one  u  on  State  affairs,  printed  at  Hillsborough, 
1788  "  ;  and  "  an  address  on  Federal  policy  to  the  Citizens  of 
No.  C.,  a  1788  "  ;  and  the  "  Journal  of  the  Provincial  Congress 
of  No.  C.,  a  held  at  Hallifax  the  4  of  April,  1776,"  which 
papers  have  been  in  my  possession  ever  since. 

Certifyed  Novr.  25th,  1830. 

(signed)         J.  McKNiTT. 

In  an  address  delivered  at  an  Academy  near  Charlotte,  pub 
lished  in  the  Raleigh  Minerva  of  loth  Augt,  1809,  the  Meck 
lenburg  Declaration  is  distinctly  stated,  etc. 

As  to  the  full  sheet  being  in  an  unknown  handwrite,  it 
matters  not  who  may  have  thus  copyed  the  original  record  : 
by  comparing  the  copy  deposited  with  Genl.  Davie  they  two 
will  be  found  so  perfectly  the  same,  so  far  as  his  is  preserved, 
that  no  imposition  is  possible — the  one  from  the  same  original 
as  the  other  is  conclusive.  I  have  therefore  always  taken  from 
the  one  which  is  entire,  where  the  other  is  lost,  the  entire  sheet 


136        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

is  most  probably  a  copy  taken  long  since  from  the  original 
for  some  person,  corrected  by  Jno.  McKnitt  Alexander,  and 
now  sent  on.  the  roll  of  pamphlets  with  which  these  two 
papers  were  found  I  never  knew  were  amongst  his  old  survey 
ing  and  other  old  papers  untill  after  his  death,  they  may 
have  been  unrolled  since  1788. 

(signed)         J.  McKNiTT. 

When  last  known  to  be  extant,  the  originals  of 
the  foregoing  documents  were  in  the  possession  of 
David  L.  Swain.  Swain  was  governor  of  North 
Carolina  from  1833  to  r^3^>  president  of  the  State 
University  from  1835  to  J868,  and  "  Historical 
Agent "  for  procuring  documents  relating  to  North 
Carolina  history  during  the  fifties.  Much  of  his 
great  historical  collection,  including  manuscripts 
borrowed  from  the  State  archives,  from  the  univer. 
sity,  and  from  private  persons,  was  scattered  after 
his  death  in  I8681;  and  practically  all  the  original 
documents  collected  before  that  date  to  prove  that 
Mecklenburg  county  declared  independence  in 
1775  were  lost.  As  early  as  1851  Governor  Swain2 
had  in  his  possession  all  the  original  papers  that 
were  copied  into  the  State  Pamphlet,  the  preface  to 
which  was  written  by  him  for  Governor  Montfort 

1  Sketch  of  Swain  in  Peek's  Lives  of  Distinguished  North  Carolinians^ 
and  private  information  from  Dr.  Kemp  P.  Battle,  ex-president  of  the  Univ. 
of  N.  C.  At  the  time  of  Governor  Swain's  death,  the  documents  which 
did  not  belong  to  him  were,  unfortunately,  in  his  private  library,  and  not 
mentioned  in  his  will.  During  the  Reconstruction  period  many  were  lost, 
sold,  or  given  away.  All  that  remains  of  the  Swain  collection,  of  which 
the  writer  has  any  knowledge,  is  in  the  State  archives,  in  the  archives  of 
the  University  of  North  Carolina,  and  in  the  Emmet  Collection  in  the 
N.  Y.  Pub.  Lib. 

*  Swain  to  Benson  J.  Lossing,  Dec.  20,  1851  ;  transcript  in  the  Bancroft 
Collection,  N,  Y.  Pub.  Lib. 


Copy  of  the  certificate  attached  by  Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander  to  the  anonymous 
manuscript  and  his  father's. 


// 


^/if//r'ffc    I /jit   riiS/lr/>^/fa)<SawS>f''ttyf-*,a /•,*,<  /£tJ 

0  fAt-'t/'  YV  &i?^<&&t^t-fsf^,  cy/LoL4S&  /Mlt-ifi;ttj   'tt  {.-ft/ft.*/*/  /rt-^f-n;  r'wi-n) 
/  fl  .  /->       /"        •     w  '  /  ''1'' 

fM^O'Ht)  Ur/l4.^Aj  €d  t-n^iJ/,',  {f?AsAs)/frs)  /7/u'.t/J  U^f/    -  /#fi{.ff/f}. 

./  /.    /.  ,J         /    /.  /  ';       ^ 


'*  ViJ-i/  £ 

//          */        ' 

sieA;1' tf.  {..*?  dt-ft.-/~l\ 


The  Davie  Copy  137 

Stokes.  "  After  that  pamphlet  was  compiled,"  said 
Governor  William  A.  Graham  in  a  special  message 
to  the  Legislature  on  January  8,  1847,  "the  various 
original  papers  referred  to  in  it  were  returned  by 
Governor  Stokes  to  Dr.  J.  McKnitt  Alexander, 
of  Mecklenburg,  at  the  request  of  the  latter,  by 
whom  they  had  been  collected  and  furnished  to 
the  General  Assembly.  These  were  obtained  from 
the  family  of  the  only  son  and  Executor  of  Dr. 
Alexander  (both  father  and  son  being  now  dead)  in 
the  Autumn  of  1845,  and  are  now  in  this  office." 
Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander's  certificate  to  the 
foregoing  manuscripts  identifies  them  as  those  re 
ferred  to  in  his  certificate  to  the  narrative  and 
resolutions  published  in  1819  and  reprinted  in  the 
State  Pamphlet.  He  certified  the  latter  to  be  a 
true  copy  of  papers  left  in  his  hands  by  John 
McKnitt  Alexander.  The  published  document  is 
not  quite  word  for  word  the  same  as  what  appeared 
in  the  manuscript  in  an  unknown  handwriting,  but 
this  was  due  for  the  most  part  to  emendations 
made  when  it  was  first  printed  from  Dr.  Joseph 
McKnitt  Alexander's  letter  to  William  Davidson. 
Colonel  Folk's  transcript  of  that  letter1  shows  that 
in  copying  the  manuscript  in  an  unknown  hand 
writing  Dr.  Alexander  inserted  "  Resolved  "  before 
each  resolution  and  "  A.  M."  before  "  2  o'clock"  in 
the  accompanying  narrative,  and  omitted  the  words 
"  civil  and  religious"  in  the  third  resolution,  a  line 
of  the  narrative  immediately  following  the  resolu 
tions,  and  the  word  "  up  "  in  the  phrase  following 

1  See  Appendix. 


138        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

the  omitted  line.  With  these  exceptions  he  copied 
accurately. 

The  committee  appointed  by  the  Legislature  of 
North  Carolina  in  November,  1830,  which  reported 
that  they  had  "examined,  collated,  and  arranged 
all  the  documents  which  have  been  accessible  to 
them  touching  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
by  the  citizens  of  Mecklenburg,"  undoubtedly  ex 
amined  the  papers  referred  to  by  Dr.  Alexander. 
The  date  of  the  certificate  to  those  reproduced 
above,  November  25,  as  well  as  its  tenor,  shows 
that  it  was  addressed  to  that  committee.  It  is  most 
likely  that  they  were  among  the  papers  obtained  in 
1845  from  the  family  of  Dr.  Alexander's  son  and 
borrowed  from  the  Executive  Office  in  Raleigh  by 
Governor  Swain  some  time  before  1851. 

Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander  published  the 
notes  on  the  Mecklenburg  resolutions  contained  in 
the  "  half  sheet "  written  by  his  father  in  the 
Yadkin  and  Catawba  Journal  (Salisbury,  N.  C.) 
of  November  9,  1830.  Extracts  copied  from  the 
original  manuscript  are  also  to  be  found  in  a  pub 
lished  address  delivered  at  Wake  Forest  College 
in  1852  by  Romulus  M.  Saunders.  When  preparing 
this  address  Judge  Saunders  examined  all  the  docu 
ments  on  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  then  in  the 
possession  of  Governor  Swain.  He  describes  the 
Alexander  manuscripts  as  "  Two  papers,  furnished 
by  Dr.  Alexander,  who  certifies  that  they  were 
found  by  him  among  some  old  pamphlets  of  his 
father's,  the  one  a  half -sheet  in  the  hand-writing  of 
John  McKnitt  Alexander,  the  other  a  full  sheet  in 


The  Davie  Copy  139 

some  *  unknown  hand.'  These  papers  were  stitched 
together ;  the  half-sheet  is  an  old  paper,  and  from 
its  appearance,  I  should  say  in  all  reasonable  pro 
bability  is  the  oldest  manuscript  we  have  of  the 
meeting  of  May,  1775.  The  other  sheet  gives  the 
same  statement  and  resolutions  as  published,  and 
has  one  or  two  corrections  in  the  hand-writing  of 
John  McKnitt  Alexander." 

The  carefully  prepared  copies  of  the  Alexander 
manuscripts  are  in  a  volume  of  historical  matter  of 
the  year  1775  in  the  Bancroft  Collection  (America. 
1 775.  Vol.  ii.,  p.  69).  The  volume  consists  mostly  of 
transcripts  of  manuscripts  relating  to  America  in 
the  British  archives  in  London.  A  part  of  it  is 
devoted  to  matter  on  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration 
collected  by  Bancroft,  and  includes  letters  of  Gov 
ernor  Swain,  Charles  Phillips,  Hugh  Blair  Grigsby, 
and  Henry  S.  Randall.  Bancroft  was  in  correspond 
ence  with  Swain  as  early  as  1835  and  as  late  as 
1858.  The  scrupulous  regard  for  accuracy  with 
which  the  papers  reproduced  above  were  manifestly 
prepared,  their  agreement  with  extracts  from  the 
original  manuscripts  published  in  1830  and  1852, 
the  copyist's  notes  upon  the  condition  of  the  origi 
nals,  the  opportunity  afforded  Bancroft  by  his 
acquaintance  with  Governor  Swain  of  obtaining 
accurate  copies,  his  keen  interest  in  the  Mecklen 
burg  controversy,  and  his  belief  in  the  accuracy  of 
the  copies  which  he  obtained  at  the  time  when  the 
originals  were  extant,  render  it  certain  that  these 
copies  are  perfect  reproductions  of  the  originals. 

Notwithstanding   the  statement  on  a  mutilated 


140        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

portion  of  the  paper  in  John  McKnitt  Alexander's 
handwriting  that  the  "  foregoing  [was]  extracted 
from  the  old  minutes  &c.,  "  it  was  obviously  pre 
pared  after  the  destruction  of  the  records  of  the 
Mecklenburg  committee  in  April,  1800.  Alexander 
no  doubt  meant  that  he  reproduced  in  substance 
what  had  been  stated  in  the  "  old  minutes  &c. "  as 
he  recalled  them.  Such  a  crude  paper  would  never 
have  been  written  were  the  records  or  transcripts 
of  them  accessible.  The  entire  paper  is  on  its  face 
a  narrative  of  events  long  passed  away,  some  of 
which  occurred  during  the  later  years  of  the  Revo 
lutionary  War,  and  it  recites  many  circumstances 
for  which  John  McKnitt  Alexander  obviously  drew 
upon  his  memory.  Errors  in  regard  to  the  person 
who  issued  the  order  for  the  meeting  described  and 
in  regard  to  the  clerk  of  the  meeting,  which  will  be 
noticed  later,  are  revealed  by  the  testimony  of 
others  who  attended  it.  Moreover,  Alexander  ex 
pressed  his  uncertainty  about  facts  which  must  have 
been  stated  in  the  records.  He  wrote  Joseph  for 
William  Hooper,  afterwards  correcting  his  error, 
and  Hughes  for  Hewes.  He  was  in  doubt  as  to 
whether  it  was  the  "  first  or  2d "  meeting  of  the 
committee  men  held  in  Charlotte  after  the  retreat 
of  Cornwallis  that  appointed  a  court  of  inquiry. 
He  might  easily  have  satisfied  himself  on  this  point 
could  he  have  consulted  the  records  of  the  Meck 
lenburg  committee  and  court  of  inquiry  which 
were  burned  in  his  house.  He  wrote  so  long 
after  sending  a  copy  of  the  Mecklenburg  resolutions 
to  Hugh  Williamson  that  he  thought  at  first  that 


The  Davie  Copy 

it  was  sent  in  1785,  and  twice  thereafter  recollected 
a  different  year.  His  inadvertency,  on  two  occa 
sions,  in  writing  "18"  and  "180"  when  intending 
to  write  "1775"  makes  it  plain  that  he  wrote  in 
1800  or  later.  Even  if  it  could  be  demonstrated, 
in  the  face  of  this  evidence,  that  the  paper  co-ex 
isted  with  the  records  that  were  burned  in  April, 
1800,  John  McKnitt  Alexander's  crude  notes  on  the 
resolutions  which  he  understood  to  be  a  declara 
tion  of  independence  prove  conclusively  that  their 
phraseology  was  not  fixed  in  his  memory. 

A  comparison  of  the  foregoing  papers  reveals 
unmistakable  evidence  that  the  paper  in  an  un 
known  handwriting  was  prepared  from  Alexander's 
notes.  The  anonymous  paper  is  clearly  not  an 
original  draft.  It  is  nothing  more  than  a  revision 
of  the  notes,  with  a  few  facts  added,  and  retaining 
many  of  the  better-worded  phrases  of  both  the 
narrative  and  condensed  resolutions  or  decrees. 
The  numerous  coincidences  of  order  and  form  in 
which  the  same  facts  are  stated  in  the  two  papers 
need  not  be  pointed  out  specifically.  The  paper 
which  was  attached  to  Alexander's  notes  contains 
the  errors  found  in  the  notes  as  to  the  principals 
at  the  meeting,  gives  Hooper  the  name  of  Joseph, 
afterwards  corrected  in  both  papers,  and  repeats 
the  statement  that  the  resolutions  were  adopted 
at  12  o'clock  at  night,  which  was  subsequently 
changed  to  2  o'clock.  Corrections  made  at  the 
time  of  writing  in  the  resolutions  as  well  as  in  the 
narrative  also  show  that  the  records  were  not  at 
hand  when  they  were  prepared.  Only  two  correc- 


i42         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

tions  are  attributed  to  John  McKnitt  Alexander  by 
his  son.  Instances  of  changes  made  in  the  text  of 
the  resolutions  at  the  time  of  writing  may  be  seen 
in  the  third  resolution,  where  the  half-formed  word 
"general,"  before  "congress,"  was  struck  out; 
in  the  fourth  resolution,  where  the  phrase  struck 
out  and  rewritten  could  not  have  been  copied  from 
an  original  record  by  the  grossest  inadvertency, 
nor  left  uncorrected  in  the  manuscript  of  any  one 
of  ordinary  intelligence;  in  the  fifth  resolution, 
where  the  word  "  issue  "  was  substituted  for  "  hear," 
which  appears  in  the  same  connection  in  Alexander's 
notes,  by  writing  not  above  but  on  the  line,  and 
hence  before  the  next  word  was  written  ;  and  in  the 
same  resolution  where  the  word  "province"  was 
substituted  for  "  State.  "  The  writer  would  certainly 
not  have  assumed  to  improve  the  phraseology  of 
the  resolutions  as  well  as  the  historical  statement 
if  he  copied  from  a  record,  nor  would  John 
McKnitt  Alexander  have  changed  only  two  words 
if  he  himself  did  not  rely  solely  upon  his  memory 
for  the  form  of  the  resolutions.  The  number  and 
character  of  the  emendations  in  the  resolutions 
preclude  the  possibility  of  their  being  corrections 
of  errors  made  in  transcribing  an  original  record. 
Finally  the  literary  style  of  the  resolutions  and 
narrative  betray  a  common  authorship.  They 
exhibit  the  same  method  of  frequently  presenting 
several  verbs  and  nouns  to  express  the  same  action 
or  thing ;  contain  some  of  the  same  peculiar  words; 
present  the  same  ambitious,  forcible,  but  inaccurate 
diction,  and,  in  a  word,  have  the  same  ring  through- 


The  Davie  Copy  143 

out.1  They  bear  every  mark  of  having  been  writ 
ten  by  some  one  endeavoring  to  express  the  spirit 
of  the  period  and  to  make  it  as  strong  as  possible. 
The  style  resembles  that  of  Alexander's  notes,  and 
many  words  and  phrases  of  the  narrative  and  reso 
lutions  are  to  be  found  in  the  notes,  but  this  is  a  far 
more  scholarly  paper.  It  is  wholly  unlike  that  of 
Ephraim  Brevard,  who  is  said  to  have  been  au 
thor  of  the  "  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Indepen 
dence.  "  Brevard  was  a  graduate  of  Princeton,  an 
able  writer,  and  the  acknowledged  draftsman  of  the 
Mecklenburg  resolves  of  May  31,  1775.  He  could 
not  have  written  a  paper  with  such  numerous  tau 
tologies  and  bungling  imitation  of  the  language  of 
legal  instruments. 

Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander  stated  in  his 
certificate  accompanying  the  document  published 
in  the  Raleigh  Register  of  April  30,  1819,  that  he 
found  it  "mentioned  on  file"  that  a  copy  of  the 
"  proceedings  "  was  sent  to  Gen.  William  R.  Davie. 
The  Davie  copy,  in  John  McKnitt  Alexander's 
handwriting,  was  found  in  a  mutilated  condition 
among  General  Davie's  papers  shortly  after  his  death 
in  i  820.*  As  far  as  it  was  preserved,  it  was  "perfectly 
the  same,  "  according  to  Dr.  Alexander's  certificate 
of  November  25,  1830,  as  the  paper  in  an  unknown 
handwriting  from  which  he  prepared  the  publication 
of  1819.  Instead  of  copying  directly  from  the 
Davie  manuscript,  which  they  described  as  "  some- 

1  H.  S.  Randall :  Life  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  iii.,  581. 

9  See  Dr.  Henderson's  certificate,  State  Pamphlet,  and  AT,  C.  Univ.  Mag.^ 
May,  1853,  ii.,  170.  In  1853,  only  the  last  two  of  the  resolutions  printed 
in  the  Raleigh  Register  in  1819  appeared  in  the  Davie  paper. 


144        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

what  torn,  but  is  entirely  legible,"  the  editors  of 
the  State  Pamphlet  reprinted  the  resolutions  and 
historical  note  from  the  Raleigh  Register  as  the 
paper  "  originally  deposited  by  John  McKnitt 
Alexander  in  the  hands  of  Gen.  Davie.  "  The  age 
and  trustworthiness  of  the  Davie  paper  and  of  its 
counterpart  in  the  unknown  handwriting  are  fixed 
by  the  conclusion  to  the  former1: 

It  may  be  worthy  of  notice  here  to  observe  that  the  foregoing 
statement,  though  fundamentally  correct,  yet  may  not  literally 
correspond  with  the  original  record  of  the  transactions  of  said 
delegation  and  court  of  enquiry ',  as  all  those  records  and  papers 
were  burnt  with  the  house  on  April  6th,  1800;  but  previous  to 
that  time  of  1800,  a  full  copy  of  said  records,  at  the  request 
of  Doctor  Hugh  Williamson,  then  of  New  York,  but  formerly 
a  representative  in  Congress  from  this  State,  was  forwarded  to 
him  by  Col.  Wm.  Polk,  in  order  that  those  early  transactions 
might  fill  their  proper  place  in  a  history  of  this  State  then 
writing  by  said  Doctor  Williamson  in  New  York. 

Certified  to  the  best  of  my  recollection  and  belief >  this  3d  day 
of  September,  1800,  by 

J.  McK.  ALEXANDER. 
Mecklenburg  County,  N.  C. 

This  certificate  of  John  McKnitt  Alexander 
remained  unknown  to  the  world  until  the  Rev. 
Charles  Phillips,  D.D.,  professor  of  mathematics 
at  the  University  of  North  Carolina,  and  secretary 
of  the  Historical  Society  of  the  University,  copied 
it  from  the  original  Davie  paper  placed  in  his  hands 
by  Governor  Swain,  and  published  it  in  an  elaborate 
article  contributed  by  him  to  the  North  Carolina 
University  Magazine  of  May,  1853.  The  Davie 

1  N.  C.  Univ.  Mag.,  May,  1853,  ii.,  175.  The  italics  are  not  in  the 
original. 


The  Davie  Copy  145 

paper  was  removed  from  the  Executive  Office  at 
Raleigh  by  Governor  Swain  for  critical  inspection 
and  lost  between  1868  and  1875,  when  the  Swain 
collection  was  scattered.  The  authenticity  of  this 
certificate  has  rarely  been  questioned,  and  many 
times  after  its  publication  Professor  Phillips  con 
firmed  its  textual  accuracy  as  given  above  in  its  integ 
rity.1  "  His  high  personal  character,"  said  James  C. 
Welling,  who  knew  him,  "  is  a  sufficient  guarantee 
for  his  loyalty  to  truth  in  this  matter.  Moreover, 
as  the  document  at  the  time  of  its  publication  was 
still  in  the  custody  of  Governor  Swain,  it  is  impos 
sible  that  a  member  of  his  faculty,  writing  with  his 
full  cognizance,  could  have  published  a  falsification 
of  the  document  without  instantaneous  detection 
and  exposure.  " 

Letters  of  Governor  Swain  in  the  New  York 
Public  Library,  written  during  the  fifties  to  George 
Bancroft  and  to  Benson  J.  Lossing,  contain  many 
references  to  the  Davie  manuscript  and  other  origi 
nal  documents  on  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration 
then  in  his  possession.2  He  stated  repeatedly  that 
there  was  no  evidence  satisfactory  to  his  mind 
"that  the  papers  purporting  to  be  Mecklenburg 
declarations  are  true  copies  of  the  original  record  "; 
and  that  the  Davie  paper  was  written  in  September, 

1  James  C.  Welling  in  Mag.  of  Amer.  Hist.,  March,  1889,  xxi.,  223  ; 
Professor  Phillips  in  N.  Y.  Evening  Post,  May  19,  1875,  and  in  letters  to 
P.  B.  Means,  published  in  1887  in  a  pamphlet  entitled  "  May,  1775,"  con 
taining  a  reprint  of  his  article  of  1853  ;  Gov.  Graham's  Address,  87. 

9  Swain  to  Lossing,  December  20,  1851  ;  to  Bancroft,  March  6,  1858,  and 
March  18,  1858.— New  York  Public  Library.    Cf.  Swain  to  H.  S.  Randall, 
April  6,    1858,  printed  in  Tompkins's  History  of  Mecklenburg  County,  ii, 
53-54,  from  a  copy  in  the  Draper  Collection. 
10 


146         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

1800.  "  It  was  not  taken  from  the  record,"  he 
said,  "  it  is  not  shown  to  be  a  copy  of  a  copy,  or 
that  there  was  a  copy  extant  in  September,  1 800.  " 
"  While  I  have  never  assumed  to  speak  ex  cathedra 
upon  this  subject,"  he  wrote  in  1851,  "I  have 
never  concealed  my  opinions  from  my  friends. 
Wheeler  and  Wiley  were  fully  apprized  of  them, 
and  the  former  persisted  in  maintaining  the  authen 
ticity  of  the  paper,  in  despite  of  assurances  from 
me  that  no  one  of  the  three  gentlemen  to  whom 
his  book  is  dedicated  would  sustain  him. " 1  Gov 
ernor  Swain  changed  his  mind  more  than  once  as 
to  whether  a  formal  declaration  of  independence 
was  ever  adopted  in  Mecklenburg,  but  always 
maintained  that  there  was  no  document  which  fixed 
with  certainty  the  date  of  the  alleged  declaration  ; 
"  nor,  with  the  exception  of  a  series  of  doggerel 
verses  which  have  recently  come  into  my  posses 
sion,"  he  wrote  Bancroft  in  1858,  "  is  there  any 
paper  containing  a  direct  reference  to  the  subject 
which  I  suppose  to  be  of  earlier  date  than  Septem 
ber,  1800." 

The  certificate  of  the  Davie  copy  constitutes  the 
last  link  in  the  chain  of  documentary  evidence,  all 
proceeding  from  John  McKnitt  Alexander,  which 
proves  that  the  "  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of 
Independence "  is  a  distorted  record  of  a  true 
manifesto  of  Mecklenburg  county,  clothed  in  lan 
guage  wholly  different  from  that  of  the  true  mani 
festo,  conceived  in  the  imperfect  memory  of  John 

1  Wheeler  dedicated  his  History  of  North  Carolina  to  Bancroft,  Force 
and  Swain. 


The  Davie  Copy  147 

McKnitt  Alexander,  and  written  twenty-five  years 
after  its  alleged  date.  Alexander  professed  to  be 
only  "  fundamentally  correct  "  in  his  "  statement," 
which  included  the  declaration  and  his  history  of  it. 
He  said  that  it  might  not  "literally  correspond" 
with  the  original  records,  "  as  all  those  records  and 
papers "  had  been  burnt ;  and  he  mentions  no 
memoranda  that  had  been  preserved.  As  if  these 
caveats  were  not  enough  to  prevent  misconstruction, 
he  was  careful  to  certify  only  according  to  his  best 
"  recollection  and  belief.  "  "  As  water  in  finding 
its  natural  level  can  never  rise  higher  than  its 
source,  so  the  '  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Inde 
pendence  '  can  never  rise  higher  than  its  natural 
level  in  these  '  recollections '  and  *  beliefs '  of  its 
original  sponsor.  "  1  In  John  McKnitt  Alexander's 
rough  notes  we  find  his  reminiscences  as  he  re 
duced  them  to  writing  before  the  Davie  copy  was 
prepared — the  Davie  paper  in  embyro.  Upon  no 
other  supposition  can  their  existence  be  accounted 
for.  The  internal  evidence  that  Alexander's  notes 
were  written  in  1800  or  later  without  the  aid  of  the 
records,  which  were  destroyed  in  April  of  that  year, 
the  internal  evidence  that  the  manuscript  in  an  un 
known  handwriting  was  not  transcribed  from  those 
records,  the  similarity  and  identical  features  of  the 
two  papers  and  the  corrections  in  one  of  them  in 
dicating  that  the  anonymous  paper  was  a  revision 
of  the  notes,  the  significant  fact  that  John  McKnitt 
Alexander  attached  these  papers  together,  and, 
finally,  Alexander's  own  admission  that  the  Davie 

1  Mag.  of  Am.  Hist.,  March,  1889,  xxi.,  224. 


148        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

copy,  dated  September  3,  1800,  and  literally  the 
same  as  the  paper  in  an  unknown  handwriting,  was 
written  from  memory,  prove  beyond  the  shadow  of 
a  doubt  that  his  notes  were  the  basis  of  the  other 
papers.  These  documents  tell  the  story  of  the 
transfiguration  of  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  of  May 
31,  1775,  seen  through  the  prismatic  glass  of  Alex 
ander's  imperfect  memory,  into  the  "  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  of  Independence." 

We  have  no  reason  to  believe  that  John  McKnitt 
Alexander  refreshed  his  memory  of  the  resolutions 
which  he  understood  to  be  a  declaration  of  inde 
pendence  within  thirteen  years  before  the  loss  of 
the  records.  He  states  in  his  notes  that  he  sent  a 
copy  to  Dr.  Hugh  Williamson  in  i  787  or  sooner. 
Governor  Montfort  Stokes  recollected  in  1831  to 
have  seen  this  copy  in  Dr.  Williamson's  possession 
in  the  year  1793. 1  Nothing  short  of  infallibility 
could  have  enabled  Governor  Stokes  to  identify  the 
phraseology  of  a  paper  which  he  saw  but  once, 
thirty-eight  years  previously.  His  testimony  proves 
no  more  than  that  he  saw  a  paper  of  similar  tenor 
to  that  of  the  Davie  copy,  for  John  McKnitt 
Alexander  himself  claimed  to  reproduce  but  its 
substance.  There  was  no  issue  as  to  the  paper 
adopted  in  Mecklenburg  in  May,  1775,  when  Gov 
ernor  Stokes  gave  his  testimony,  nor  until  Peter 
Force  published  the  May  3ist  resolves  in  1838. 
Williamson's  History  of  North  Carolina  3  is  silent 
concerning  a  declaration  of  independence  by  Meck- 

1  See  State  Pamphlet,  Preface, 
*  Published  in  1812. 


The  Davie  Copy  149 

lenburg  county,  for  the  good  reason  that  he  was 
favored  with  a  copy  of  the  records  before  they  had 
been  burnt.  Williamson  says  in  his  preface  that  he 
proposed  to  bring  his  work  down  to  the  year  1 790 
and  had  collected  materials  for  that  purpose,  but, 
"considering  that  the  history  of  the  province  may 
be  acceptable  to  many  people  who  are  less  solicit 
ous  about  late  military  transactions,"  he  desisted 
from  his  plan.  The  history  proper  closes  with 
the  dispute  between  Governor  Martin  and  the 
Assembly,  culminating  in  the  dissolution  of  the 
Assembly  by  the  governor  in  1774  ;  but  the  re 
flections  of  the  author  on  the  political  situation  of 
the  colony  at  that  time,  in  which  he  touches  upon 
"  the  desire  of  independence  and  self-government" 
"  when  people  are  separated  by  nature  from  other 
nations  and  other  governments,"  offered  a  most 
appropriate  but  neglected  opportunity  to  say  a 
word  of  the  "  gigantic  step  of  its  county  of  Meck 
lenburg,  "  if  John  McKnitt  Alexander  furnished 
him  with  anything  but  the  paper  of  May  31,  1775. 
The  stoppage  of  his  narrative  did  not  prevent 
Williamson  from  recording  statistics  of  exports 
during  the  years  1785  to  1788,  the  discovery  of  a 
subterranean  wall  in  Rowan  county  as  late  as  1794, 
and  the  introduction  of  machines  for  spinning  cot 
ton  in  the  year  1811.  Williamson  died  in  New 
York  May  22,  1819.  The  documents  which  he 
collected  for  the  continuation  of  his  work  are 
supposed  to  have  been  burnt  in  a  warehouse  in 
Pearl  Street,  New  York,  in  the  great  fire  of  I835.1 

1  Professor  Phillips,  in  the  N.  Y.  Evening  Post,  May  19,  1875. 


150         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Like  the  critics  of  later  days,  John  McKnitt 
Alexander  no  doubt  believed  when  he  last  saw 
the  records  of  the  Mecklenburg  committee  that  the 
May  3ist  resolves  were  a  declaration  of  independ 
ence.  In  1800,  their  provisional  character,  obscured 
by  the  permanent  separation  from  Great  Britain 
by  the  Declaration  of  July  4,  1776,  which  made 
Mecklenburg  an  independent  county  dating  from 
May  31,  1775,  had  passed  completely  from  his 
mind.  Of  their  form,  as  we  see  from  his  notes* 
he  had  dim  recollections.  A  reproduction  from 
mere  memory  of  a  document  whose  import  he 
misunderstood  when  he  had  the  original  before  him 
years  previously  and  whose  phraseology  he  had 
forgotten,  prepared  at  a  time  when  the  document 
was  remembered  by  many  as  a  declaration  of  inde 
pendence,  and  originating  in  a  patriotic  effort  to 
preserve  from  oblivion  the  worthy  sentiments  and 
actions  of  himself  and  his  neighbors,  could  hardly 
be  expected  to  be  anything  but  an  exaggerated 
travesty  of  the  original.  His  rough  notes  were 
probably  the  result  of  his  first  attempt  to  recall 
what  was  done  in  Charlotte  in  May,  1775,  after 
the  loss  of  the  records.  He  seems  to  have  had 
no  intention,  when  he  sat  down  to  write  them,  of 
attempting  to  reproduce  the  phraseology  of  the 
document  which  he  understood  to  be  a  declaration 
of  independence.  The  substance  of  the  document 
was  clearly  all  that  his  failing  memory  could  supply. 
The  substance  of  the  Mecklenburg  resolves  of 
May  31,  1775,  tne  portion  which  approaches  a 
declaration  of  independence,  and  the  portion  with 


The  Davie  Copy 


which    Alexander's  recollections  are  identified,     is 
contained  in  the  preamble    and  first  five  resolves  : 


May  3 ist  Resolves. 

Whereas  ....  we  conceive  that 
all  laws  and  commissions  con 
firmed  by,  or  derived  from  the 
authority  of  the  King  or  Par 
liament,  are  annulled  and  vaca 
ted,  and  the  former  civil  con 
stitution  of  these  colonies,  for 
the  present,  wholly  suspended. 


I.  That  all  commissions,  civil 
and  military,  heretofore  grant 
ed  by  the  Crown,  to  be  exer 
cised    in    these    colonies,  are 
null   and   void,  and   the   con 
stitution    of    each    particular 
colony  wholly  suspended. 

II.  That  the  Provincial  Con 
gress  of  each  province,  under 
the  direction  of  the  great  Con 
tinental  Congress,  is  invested 
with  all  legislative  and  execu 
tive  powers   within    their  re 
spective     provinces  ;  [2]  and 
that   no   other   legislative    or 
executive  power,  does,    or  can 
exist,  at  this  time,  in  any   of 
these  colonies. 

III.  As   all  former  laws  are 
now   suspended   in   this   pro 
vince,  and  the  Congress  have 
not  yet   provided   others,  we 
judge    it    necessary,    for   the 
better  preservation    of    good 


Alexander's  Notes. 

ist  We  (the  County)  by  a 
Solemn  and  awfull  vote,  Dis 
solved  [or  abjured]  our  allegi 
ance  to  King  George  &  the 
British  Nation. 


2d.  Declared  ourselves  a  free 
&  independent  people,  [2] 
having  a  right  and  capable  to 
govern  ourselves(as  a  part  of 
North  Carolina.) 


3d.  In  order  to  have  laws  as 
a  rule  of  life — for  our  future 
Government  We  formed  a 
Code  of  laws ;  by  adopting 
our  former  wholesome  laws. 


i52        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 


order,  to  form  certain  rules 
and  regulations  for  the  inter 
nal  government  of  this  county, 
until  laws  shall  be  provided 
for  us  by  the  Congress. 

IV.  That  the  inhabitants  of 
this  county  do  ....  chuse  a 
Colonel    and    other    military 
officers,   who    shall  hold  and 
excercise  their  several  powers 
by  virtue  of  this  choice,  and 
independent  of  the  Crown  of 
Great    Britain,     and     former 
constitution  of  this  province. 

V.  That   for  the  better  pre 
servation  of  the  peace  and  ad 
ministration   of   justice,  each 
of   those    [milita]   companies 
do  chuse  from  their  own  body, 
two  discreet  freeholders,  who 

shall  be  empowered to 

decide     and     determine     all 

matters  of  controversy, 

[and  by  the   succeeding    re 
solves   to  be  members  of  the 
Committee  of  Safety]. 

VI-XX. 


4th.  And  as  there  was  then 
no  Officers  civil  or  Millitary 
in  our  County 

We  Decreed  that  every  Mil- 
litia  officer  in  s'd  County 
should  hold  and  occupy  his 
former  commission  and  Grade 


And  that  every  member 
present,  of  this  Committee 
shall  henceforth  [act]  as  a 
Justice  of  the  Peace  in  the 
Character  of  a  Committee 
M[an,  to]  hear  and  determine 
all  Controversies  agreeable  to 
s'd  laws  [and  to  preserve] 
peace  Union  &  harmony  in 
s'd  County — and  to  use  every 
[exertion  to]  spread  the  Elec- 
trial  fire  of  freedom  among 
ourselves  &  u 


5th.  &c.  &c.  many  other  laws 
&  ordinances  were  then 
ma[de]. 

Resolve  XVIII  of  May  31,  1775,  which  made  all 
the  others  defeasible  by  the  possible  abandonment 
on  the  part  of  the  British  Government  of  its  arbi 
trary  policy  toward  the  colonies,  is  among  the 
"  other  laws  and  ordinances  "  which  John  McKnitt 
Alexander  could  not  remember.  This  is  far  less 


The  Davie  Copy  153 

remarkable  than  the  failure  of  the  New  York  and 
Boston  printers  of  1775  to  notice  it.  They  copied 
the  preamble  and  first  four  resolves  and  sum 
marized  or  omitted  to  mention  the  other  sixteen. 
Without  this  limitation,  with  the  word  "  dissolved  " 
substituted  for  "  suspended ,"  and  the  qualification 
as  to  time  omitted  in  the  preamble  and  Resolves 
I  and  II,  the  subject-matter  of  the  first  five  resolves 
and  the  order  in  which  each  appears  in  the  series 
agree  "  fundamentally "  with  Alexander's  notes. 
In  their  descriptions  of  the  document  of  May  31, 
1775,  Governor  Martin,  writing  in  1775,  shortly 
after  reading  the  document,  and  John  McKnitt 
Alexander,  writing  from  memory  in  1800,  failed,  as 
so  many  others  have  done,  to  note  any  of  these 
essential  features  by  which  it  fell  short  of  a  decla 
ration  of  independence.  Believing,  as  he  did,  that 
the  document  was  a  formal  declaration  of  indepen 
dence,  Alexander's  notes  on  the  first  two  resolves* 
which  in  his  mind  contained  the  declaration  proper, 
bear  less  resemblance  to  the  true  document  than 
the  others.  His  reminiscences  of  the  others  neces 
sarily  tended  to  conform  to  this  belief.  Hence  it  is 
that,  while  Alexander  rightly  recollected  that  the 
third,  fourth,  and  fifth  resolves  concerned,  respect 
ively,  laws,  military  officers,  and  civil  officers,  he 
was  in  error  as  to  their  terms.  Resolve  III  of 
May  3  ist  states  that,  as  all  former  laws  were 
suspended,  the  "  rules  and  regulations  for  the 
internal  government"  which  follow  should  be 
adopted  ;  and  Resolves  IV  and  V  order  an  election 
of  county  militia  officers  and  of  two  persons  from 


154        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

each  militia  company  to  be  justices  of  the  peace 
and  members  of  a  standing  convention,  or  com 
mittee,  having  judical  and  administrative  powers. 
The  court  records  of  Mecklenburg  show  that  the 
old  civil  and  criminal  codes,  in  so  far  as  they  did 
not  conflict  with  the  new  regulations,  continued  to 
be  the  "rule  of  life"  for  the  people  of  the  county. 
They  also  show  that  seven  alleged  "  signers  "of  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration  continued  to  preside  in 
the  county  court,  that  no  new  justices  were  elected 
to  this  court,  and  that  the  court  met  on  the  third 
Tuesday1  of  January,  April,  July,  and  October,  in 
the  courthouse  in  Charlotte — the  very  dates  and 
place  provided  by  the  May  3ist  resolves  for  the 
meetings  of  the  new  judicial  and  administrative 
body.  No  doubt  the  majority  of  the  old  committee 
men  and  military  officers  were  re-elected.  This 
fact,  with  the  actual  retention  of  British  laws,  and 
the  natural  inference  by  John  McKnitt  Alexander 
that  independent  Mecklenburg  county  could  not 
have  been  left  without  laws  and  civil  and  military 
officers  pending  the  establishment  of  a  "  more 
general  and  organized  government "  in  the  province, 
and  an  election  of  new  county  officers,  gave  him 
a  very  erroneous  idea  of  the  third,  fourth,  and  fifth 
resolves  of  May  31,  1 775 ;  but  near  enough  the  truth 
to  make  it  certain  that  he  was  struggling  to  recall 
them  when  he  wrote  his  notes.  He  concluded  that 
the  committee  men  "  formed  a  Code  of  laws  by  adopt- 

1  Thursday  appears  in  place  of  Tuesday  in  the  resolves  in  the  South-Caro 
lina  Gazette  And  Country  Journal  of  June  13,  1775.  This  is  a  misprint,  as 
will  be  seen  from  both  the  North-Carolina  Gazette  of  June  16,  1775,  and 
Governor  Martin's  transcript  of  the  resolves  in  the  Cape  Fear  Mercury. 


The  Davie  Copy  155 

ing  our  former  wholesome  laws,"  transferred  the  mil 
itary  officers  in  a  body  from  the  royal  to  the  new 
government,  and  then,  after  the  fashion  of  a  French 
coup  d'e'tat,  declared  themselves  justices  of  the 
peace  and  members  of  the  new  committee  —  a  pro 
ceeding  not  at  all  in  keeping  with  the  character  of 
this  body  of  sober,  law-abiding,  Scotch-Irish  Presby 
terians.  Resolves  VI  to  XX  concern,  for  the  most 
part,  the  duties  of  the  new  committee  men  and 
other  county  officers,  and  military  matters.  No  one 
would  be  likely  to  remember  the  details.  Alexander 
merely  noted  that  "  many  other  laws  and  ordinances 
were  then  made." 

An  attempt  to  reconstruct  the  "  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  of  Independence"  from  his  notes  prob 
ably  suggested  itself  to  John  McKnitt  Alexander 
when  writing  his  impressions  of  the  last  of  the  five 
resolves  that  he  regarded  as  the  most  important, 
the  greater  part  of  which  resolve  he  wrote  in  the 
present  tense.  It  may  be  observed  that  it  was  not 
because  he  remembered  the  phraseology  of  the  fifth 
resolve  of  the  supposed  declaration  (the  fourth  in 
his  notes)  that  he  wrote  it  in  the  present  tense,  for, 
if  so,  we  must  conclude  that  he  entirely  forgot  the 
striking  expressions  of  the  resolutions  containing 
the  declaration  itself — and  they  are  very  striking — 
while  a  resolve  respecting  the  appointment  and 
duties  of  civil  officers,  the  longest  of  the  series,  was 
indelibly  fixed  in  his  memory.  There  are  indica 
tions  that  Alexander  entrusted  to  some  person  of 
greater  literary  skill  than  himself  the  work  of  pre 
paring  from  his  notes  a  more  fitting  memorial  of 


156        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

the  "Declaration  of  Independence"  and  events 
associated  with  it.  We  have  seen  that  corrections  in 
the  manuscript  in  the  unknown  handwriting  made 
by  the  writer  show  that  it  was  to  some  extent  an 
original  composition.  How  much  of  it  was  com 
posed  by  the  anonymous  writer  will  probably  never 
be  known.  It  seems  hardly  possible  that  the  author 
of  the  halting,  ungrammatical,  yet  labored,  notes 
could  have  prepared  the  second  paper,  which  evinces 
an  incomparably  higher  degree  of  literary  ability, 
although  the  two  papers  have  a  similarity  of  style. 
Moreover,  Alexander's  notes  invariably  refer  to  the 
body  that  declared  independence  as  a  "  Committee  " 
and  to  its  members  as  "  Committee  Men,"  while  the 
other  paper  speaks  of  a  "delegation"  and  "dele 
gates.  "  It  is  true  that  Alexander  used  the  term 
"delegation  "  in  his  certificate  to  the  Davie  copy,  but 
he  could  consistently  use  no  other  when  certifying 
a  copy  of  the  paper  in  an  unknown  handwriting. 
Furthermore,  the  material  part  of  the  last  of  the 
five  resolutions,  which  the  unknown  writer  copied 
nearly  word  for  word  from  Alexander's  notes,  is 
repeated  by  him  immediately  after  the  resolution, 
as  appears  below,  and  the  term  "  Committee-man  " 
is  enclosed  in  quotation  marks,  both  of  which  facts 
would  seem  to  show  that  he  did  not  comprehend 
the  meaning  of  the  term.  The  unknown  writer  also 
used  the  word  "  unanimously,"  instead  of  "  Nem. 
Con,"  which  appears  in  the  notes.  If  this  paper  was 
prepared  by  some  person  other  than  John  McKnitt 
Alexander,  that  person  learned  from  Alexander 
facts  which  are  not  stated  in  the  notes.  Whether 


The  Davie  Copy  157 

the  corrections,  the  superior  literary  merit,  and  the 
words  different  from  those  used  in  the  notes  to 
express  the  same  thing  prove  merely  that  it  is  a 
transcript,  with  slight  changes  made  by  the  person 
who  transcribed  it,  of  a  second  draft  of  the  notes 
prepared  by  Alexander  himself,  or  that  this  paper 
is  the  original  second  draft,  is  a  matter  of  minor  im 
portance,  since  we  know  that  it  is  based  on  the 
notes. 

The  genesis  of  the  so-called  Davie  copy  of  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration,  which  for  thirty-four 
years  wore  all  the  honors  of  a  genuine  and  authentic 
document,  which  was  pointed  out  as  such  to  the  aged 
men  who  were  asked  to  say  that  they  heard  it  pro 
claimed  in  Charlotte  on  May  20,  1775,  which  was 
affirmed  to  be  such  by  the  Legislature  of  North 
Carolina  in  1831,  and  which  still  has  champions 
who  seem  to  be  ignorant  of  John  McKnitt  Alex 
ander's  certificate  to  the  manuscript  which  he  gave 
to  General  Davie,  is  demonstrated  by  placing  it 
side  by  side  with  Alexander's  notes  : 

Alexander's  Notes.  The  Reconstructed  Document. 

i.  That  whosoever  directly 
or  indirectly  abetted,  or  in  any 
way,  form,  or  manner,  coun 
tenanced  the  unchartered  and 
dangerous  invasion  of  our 
rights,  as  claimed  by  G.  brit- 
ain  is  an  enemy  to  this  Coun 
ty — to  America— and  to  the 
inherent  and  inaliable  rights 
of  man. 


158        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 


is.e    We    (the  County)  by  a 
abjured 

Solemn  and  awfull  vote,  Dis 
solved  our  allegiance  to  King 


2    We  the  Citizens  of  Meek- 
do  de 

lenburg  County  a**  hereby  ab- 
the 


George  &  the  British  Nation.     solved    few-political  bands 

which  have  connected  us  with 
the  Mother  Country,  and  here 
by  absolve  ourselves  from 
all  allegiance  to  the  British 
Crown,  and  abjure  all  polit 
ical  connection,  contract,  or 
association 

dependence  with  that  nation 
who  have  wantonly  trampled 
on  our  rights  and  liberties — 
and  inhumanly  shed  the  in 
nocent  blood  of  American 
patriots  at  Lexington. 


2?  Declared  ourselves  a  free 
&  independent  people,  having 
a  right  and  capable  to  govern 
ourselves  (as  a  part  of  North 
Carolina). 


3?  In  order  to  have  laws  as 
a  rule  of  life — for  our  future 
Government  We  formed  a 
Code  of  laws ;  by  adopting 
our  former  wholesome  laws. 


3  We    do    hereby   declare 
ourselves    a    free   and    inde 
pendent    people,  are,  and   of 
right  ought  to  be,  a  sovereign 
and    self-governing    Associa 
tion,  under  the  control  of  no 
power  other  than  that  of  our 
God  and   the  General    Gov 
ernment  of  the  gen  congress 
to  the  maintainance  of  which 
independance  civil  &  religious 
we   solemnly  pledge  to  each 
other,   our   mutual   co-opera 
tion,  our  lives,  our  fortunes, 
and  our  most  sacred  honor. 

4  As  we  now  acknowledge 
the  existance   &   controul  of 
no  law  or  legal  officer,  civil 
or  military,  within  this  county, 
we    do    hereby    ordain    and 


The  Davie  Copy 


then 

4t]?  And  as  there  was  ^  no 
Officers  civil  or  Millitary  in 
our  County 

We  Decreed  that  every 
Millitia  officer  in  s?  County 
should  hold  and  occupy  his 
former  commission  and  Grade 
And  that  every  member  pre 
sent,  of  this  Committee  shall 
henceforth  \torn\  as  a  Justice 
of  the  Peace  in  the  Character 
of  a  Committee  M  \torn\  hear 
and  determine  all  Controver 
sies  agreeable  to  s?  laws — 
\torn\  peace  Union  &  harmony 
in  s?  County — and  to  use  every 
[torn]  spread  the  Electrial  fire 
of  freedom  among  ourselves 
&  u  \torn\. 


the 

5*  ^M.  &?  &<  many  other 
laws  &  ordinances  were  then 
ma  [torn}. 


adopt,  as  a  rule  of  life,  all 
each  and  every  of  our  former 
laws,  wherein,  nevertheless, 
the  Crown  of  great  britain 

never  can 

nevertheless  can  &  ought  be 
considered  as  holding  rights, 
privileges,  immunities,  or  au 
thority  therein. 

5  It  is  also  further  de 
creed,  that  all,  each  and  every 
military  officer  in  this  county 
is  hereby  reinstated  to  his 
former  command  and  author 
ity,  he  acting  conformably  to 
these  regulations.  And  that 
every  member  present  of  this 

be 

delegation  shall  henceforth  aet 
civil  officer  er  viz  «s 
as-^  a  Justice  of  the  Peace, 
in  the  character  of  a  "  Com 
mittee-man  ",  to  hear  issue 
process,  hear  and  determine 
all  matters  of  controversy, 
according  to  said  adopted 
laws,  and  to  preserve  peace, 
and  union,  and  harmony,  in 
said  county, — and  to  use  every 
exertion  to  spread  the  love  of 
country  and  fire  of  freedom 
throughout  America,  until  a 
more  general  and  organized 
government  be  established  in 

this  State  province. 

A  selection   from  the  mem- 
shall 
bers  present  was  constituted  a 


160        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Committee   of    public    safety 
for  s?  County. 

A  number  of  bye  laws  were 
also  added,  merely  to  protect 
the  association  from  confu 
sion,  and  to  regulate  their 
general  conduct  as  citizens. 

The  design  of  the  author  of  the  paper  in  an  un 
known  handwriting,  whoever  he  may  have  been^ 
was  apparently  to  construct  from  the  notes  a  decla 
ration  of  independence  as  "flaming,"  as  Jefferson 
called  it,  as  he  could  make  it.  Of  the  four  resolu 
tions  recollected  by  Alexander,  the  last  two  form 
substantially  the  concluding  resolutions  of  the  reha 
bilitated  document.  Its  fifth  and  last  resolution,  the 
longest  in  the  series,  is  in  great  part  word  for  word 
as  it  appears  in  Alexander's  notes.  These  two 
resolutions  concerned  laws  and  county  officers  and 
required  little  original  work  by  the  unknown  writer. 
But  the  subject-matter  of  the  first  two  offered  so 
attractive  a  field  for  the  writer's  imagination  and 
rhetoric  that  they  were  extended  into  three  resolu 
tions  and  altered  almost  beyond  recognition.  Some 
of  the  most  striking  and  best  known  phrases  of  the 
Declaration  of  July  4,  1776,  were  introduced  into 
the  reconstructed  document.  At  that  early  day, 
the  phraseology  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
was  well  known,  and  the  writer  of  this  paper  could 
find  no  other  words  for  the  declaration  of  Mecklen 
burg.  These  three  short  resolutions  contain  such 
expressions  of  Jefferson's  immortal  document  as 
"  unalienable  Rights,"  "  dissolve  the  political  bands 
which  have  connected,"  "  Absolved  from  all  Allegi- 


The  Davie  Copy  161 

ance  to  the  British  Crown, "  "all  political  connexion," 
"  are,  and  of  Right,  ought  to  be,"  and  "  we  mutually 
pledge  to  each  other  our  Lives,  our  Fortunes,  and  our 
sacred  Honour."  None  of  these  expressions  are  to  be 
found  in  John  McKnitt  Alexander  s  notes.  It  was 
perceived  as  early  as  1819  that  they  were  too  nu 
merous  and  peculiar  in  structure  to  be  accidental 
coincidences.  "  Either  these  resolutions  are  a 
plagiarism  from  Mr.  Jefferson's  Declaration  of  In 
dependence,"  said  John  Adams,1  "or  Mr.  Jefferson's 
Declaration  of  Independence  is  a  plagiarism  from 
those  resolutions.  I  could  as  soon  believe  that  the 
dozen  flowers  of  Hydrangea,  now  before  my  eyes, 
were  the  work  of  chance,  as  that  the  Mecklenburg 
resolutions  and  Mr.  Jefferson's  Declaration  were 
not  derived  the  one  from  the  other."  For  many 
years  the  contestants  in  the  acrimonious  controversy 
as  to  whether  Jefferson  was  guilty  of  plagiarism 
were  unaware  that  Richard  Henry  Lee  is  the 
author  of  nearly  all  of  these  phrases  upon  which 
the  accusation  was  founded.3 

In  treating  the  genesis  of  the  manuscript  in  an 
unknown  handwriting  we  have  assumed  that  Dr. 
Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander  was  truthful  in  his  cer 
tificate  to  the  effect  that  he  found  it  with  his  father's 
notes  in  the  condition  shown  by  the  reproductions, 
that  he  did  not  recognize  the  handwriting,  that  two 
corrections  on  it  were  made  by  his  father,  and  that 
it  was  "  perfectly  the  same  "  as  the  Davie  paper  as 
far  as  the  Davie  paper  was  preserved.  In  the  ab- 

1  Adams  to  William  Bentley,  August  21,  1819  ;    Works •,  x.,  383. 

2  Lee's  resolution  for  independence,  July  2,  1776. 

II 


162        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

sence  of  the  original  Davie  paper  in  John  McKnitt 
Alexander's  handwriting  the  often  repeated  charges 
of  fraud  and  forgery  against  the  younger  Alexander 
must  be  considered.  These  charges  were  privately 
maintained  by  no  less  a  person  than  Professor 
Charles  Phillips,  who  enjoyed  the  privilege  of  ex 
amining  the  originals  of  all  these  documents  when 
they  were  in  the  possession  of  Governor  Swain.  In 
the  volume  in  the  Bancroft  Collection  which  con 
tains  the  transcripts  reproduced  above,  and  im 
mediately  before  them,  is  inserted  a  letter  of  Henry 
S.  Randall  to  Bancroft,  dated  February  7,  1859,  en 
closing  a  copy  of  a  letter  written  by  Professor 
Phillips  to  Randall  from  the  University  of  North 
Carolina  under  date  of  April  15,  1858.  Professor 
Phillips  says  that  when  he  wrote  his  article  for 
the  North  Carolina  University  Magazine  of  May, 
1853,  he  felt,  like  Governor  Swain,  "that  all  of 
the  story  about  the  2oth  of  May  could  not  stand 
before  cool  and  fair  criticism,  and  especially  that 
the  Davie  paper,  in  either  form,  would  not  be  en 
dorsed  by  any  proper  jury  in  the  land."  "  To 
me,"  he  writes  "the  assertion,  or  insinuation,  that 
Jefferson  ever  borrowed  from  Mecklenburg  is  just 
ridiculous,  and  so  it  is  to  Gov.  Swain  and  many 
others  of  our  best  informed  men  in  N.  C.  Had  old 
McN.  Alexander's  son  been  as  honorable  as  was  his 
father,  we  never  would  have  heard  of  such  an  as 
sertion.  The  condition  of  the  originals  in  our  pos 
session  here,  the  diversity  of  hand  writing,  the  fre 
quent  interlineations,  erasures  etc.  show  that  the 
younger  Alexander  tried  to  set  forth  a  poem  in 


The  Davie  Copy  163 

Alexandrian  measured  But  the  old  man's  honesty 
(see  p.  1 75  of  that  pamphlet)2  doubtless  was  sadly 
in  the  young  man's  way.  The  truth  is,  I  judge,  not 
far  from  this.  The  son  had  not  long  come  home 
from  Princeton  College  ;  the  father's  house  and  all 
the  records  were  burnt;  the  father  and  other  sur 
vivors  felt  that  some  memento  of  their  deeds  in  '75 
must  be  preserved.  So  the  son  sat  down  to  repro 
duce  the  Declaration  of  Mecklenburg,  but  was 
mistaken  as  to  date  and  form.  The  date  was  to  be 
gotten  only  from  memory ;  the  form  as  we  see,  was 
influenced  by  the  then  well  known  General  decla 
ration."  The  originals  referred  to  by  Professor 
Phillips  are  obviously  those  from  which  the  tran 
scripts  found  with  his  letter  were  made.  This  is 
confirmed  by  a  note  in  Randall's  Life  of  Thomas 
Jefferson? 

Professor  Phillips  appears  to  have  believed  that 
Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander  prepared  under  his 
father's  guidance  the  narrative  and  resolutions 
contained  in  the  manuscript  in  an  unknown  hand 
writing  ;  that  after  his  father's  death  he  destroyed 

1  Randall  says  in  his  letter  to  Bancroft  that  he  added  the  underscoring 
when  copying  Prof.  Phillips'  letter. 

*  The  reference  is  to  the  certificate  to  the  Davie  paper,  printed  in  the 
North  Carolina  University  Magazine,  May,  1853,  ",  I75« 

3  Randall  says  (iii,  574):  "We  are  informed  by  one  who  has  often 
seen  Mr.  Alexander's  manuscripts  on  this  subject  that  they  exhibit  a  diver 
sity  of  hand-writing,  frequent  interlineations,  erasures,  etc.  Whether  this 
applies  to  the  resolutions  themselves  we  are  not  specially  apprised,  but 
suppose  our  informant  intended  such  application."  The  following  extract 
from  his  letter  to  Bancroft  may  account  for  Bancroft's  silence:  "As  I  re 
marked,  Prof.  P's  letter  is  not  marked  confidential,  but  you  will  of  course 
take  good  care  that  he  is  not  brought  into  danger  by  his  his  [sic]  frankness. 
The  publication  of  his  remarks  would  probably  cost  him  his  professorship.'* 


1 64         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

a  copy  of  the  certificate  to  the  Davie  paper  which 
stated  that  they  were  written  from  memory,  and 
that  he  altered  his  father's  notes  and  the  manu 
script  in  an  unknown  handwriting  so  as  to  make 
them  say  that  his  father  acted  as  clerk  of  the  meet 
ing  to  which  they  refer,  and  that  Colonel  Adam 
Alexander  issued  the  order  for  the  meeting.  Pro 
fessor  Phillips  inferred  that  Dr.  Alexander  had  a 
copy  of  his  father's  certificate  to  the  Davie  paper, 
from  its  resemblance  to  his  certificate  to  the  docu 
ment  published  in  the  Raleigh  Register  in  1819, 
which  certificate  purported  to  state  facts  which  he 
found  "  mentioned  on  file."  "  He  told  the  truth 
about  it,"  wrote  Professor  Phillips  in  1879,'  "°ut 
not  the  whole  truth,  and  so  conveyed  to  his  readers 
something  besides  the  truth."  Such  authorities  as 
Draper,  Goodloe,  and  Welling  have  likewise  al 
leged  or  insinuated  that  the  younger  Alexander 
made  an  improper  condensation  of  a  certificate  like 
that  appended  to  the  Davie  paper.2  But,  if  their 
suspicions  be  well  founded,  why  did  he  not  also 
suppress  and  destroy  the  certificate  to  the  Davie 
paper  itself,  which  was  in  his  possession  during 
nearly  all  the  period  from  the  date  of  its  discovery 
until  1830?  The  "  Alexandrian  measure"  in  the 
story  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  was  prob 
ably  the  main  cause  of  Professor  Phillips's  distrust 
of  Dr.  Alexander.  He  no  doubt  assumed  that 
John  McKnitt  Alexander  could  not  have  fancied 

1  Phillips  to  P.  B.  Means,  May  20,  1879,  in  "  May,  1775"  27. 

5  Draper's  manuscript  work ;  Goodloe,  in  N.  Y.  Herald,  May  8,  1875  ; 
Welling,  in  the  Mag.  of  Amer.  Hist.,  xxi.,  223-224.  Cf.  Joseph  Wallis, 
in  the  National  Intelligencer,  August  13,  1857. 


The  Davie  Copy  165 

that  he,  instead  of  Ephraim  Brevard,  was  secretary 
of  a  meeting  on  so  momentous  a  subject,  and  that 
Lieutenant-Colonel  Adam  Alexander  instead  of 
Colonel  Thomas  Polk,  issued  the  order  for  it. 
The  parts  taken  by  Brevard,  Polk,  and  Abraham 
Alexander  are  established  by  the  personal  testi 
mony  of  spectators  at  the  meeting,  which  testimony 
we  have  reserved  for  critical  analysis.  It  is  difficult 
to  conjecture  what  might  have  been  the  foundation 
for  John  McKnitt  Alexander's  reminiscences,  but 
it  cannot  on  that  account  be  denied  that  when  he 
wrote  his  notes  in  1800  he  believed  that  he  had 
acted  as  secretary  of  the  meeting  which  was  in  his 
thoughts.  He  is  known  to  have  been  an  active 
participant  in  that  meeting  and  secretary  and  chair 
man  of  similar  meetings  of  the  period,1  and  it  is 
very  probable  that  he  succeeded  Brevard  as  clerk 
of  the  Mecklenburg  Committee  of  Safety.  Gov 
ernor  Swain's  theory  was  that  there  was  a  pre 
liminary  meeting  which  agreed  upon  the  general 
principles  formulated  on  May  31,  1775,  and  that 
John  McKnitt  Alexander  was  secretary.2  Strong 
evidence  that  Alexander  often  stated  that  he  had 
been  secretary  of  the  famous  meeting  is  the  belief 
of  William  B.  Alexander,  brother  of  "  J.  McKnitt," 
that  his  father  had  acted  as  such,3  and  the  testi 
mony  given  after  the  fact  had  been  called  in  ques 
tion  by  two  such  intelligent  witnesses  to  the  meeting 
as  General  Joseph  Graham  and  Rev.  Humphrey 

1  Captain  Jack's  certificate,  and  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  €.,  x.,  8700. 

*  Swain  to  B.  J.  Lossing,  December  20,  1851,  Bancroft  Coll. 

*  Ante,  p.  2. 


1 66        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Hunter,  who  were  his  neighbors  and  friends.  With 
respect  to  the  condition  of  the  original  manuscripts, 
which  Professor  Phillips  thought  to  be  proof  of  a 
posthumous  introduction  of  "  Alexandrian  measure," 
it  may  be  said  that  the  transcript  of  John  McKnitt 
Alexander's  notes  shows  clearly  that  his  initials 
and  the  word  "secretary  "  were  written  later  than  the 
context ;  but  no  diversity  of  handwriting  is  noted 
by  the  copyist.  It  is  also  evident  that  if  the  copy 
ist  noted  even  the  most  conspicuous  erasures — and 
it  seems  to  have  been  his  purpose  to  note  every 
thing  of  that  nature — the  allusions  to  Colonel 
Adam  Alexander  and  John  McKnitt  Alexander 
in  the  manuscript  in  an  unknown  handwriting,  and 
to  the  former  in  the  notes,  originally  belonged  to 
those  papers.  Professor  Phillips's  case  cannot  be 
proved  by  such  flimsy  evidence  as  this. 

The  reproduction  of  the  manuscript  in  an  un 
known  handwriting  makes  it  well-nigh  certain  that 
if  John  McKnitt  Alexander  never  recollected  that 
he  was  secretary  of  a  meeting  of  May  20,  1775,  he 
never  saw  that  manuscript,  and  the  Davie  paper 
contained  something  very  different  in  form,  perhaps 
the  rough  notes,  for  the  manuscript  in  an  unknown 
handwriting  bore  internal  evidence  of  original  com 
position  by  the  writer.  Professor  Phillips,  however, 
arrived  at  another  conclusion.  This  would  seem  to 
indicate  that  he  did  not  examine  the  manuscript 
carefully.  His  letter  to  Randall  shows  that  he  be 
lieved  that  it  was  a  copy  of  a  paper  prepared  by 
the  younger  Alexander  under  his  father's  direction 
and  that  it  was  once  in  John  McKnitt  Alexander's 


The  Davie  Copy  167 

possession  and  was  altered  after  his  death.  In  his 
contribution  to  the  North  Carolina  University 
Magazine  of  May,  1853,  Professor  Phillips  said 
with  reference  to  the  resolutions  of  May  20,  1775  : 
"The  'Davie  copy'  was  first  published  in  the 
Raleigh  Register in  April,  1819,  and  it  is  so  named 
because  the  last  two  of  its  resolutions  were  found 
on  a  mutilated  manuscript  among  the  papers  of  the 
late  General  W.  R.  Davie."  He  did  not  say  how 
much  of  the  narrative  in  the  Davie  manuscript 
was  preserved  in  1853,  and  copied  into  his  article 
nothing  but  the  certificate ;  but  in  a  letter  written 
twenty-six  years  afterwards  he  erroneously  stated 
that  the  manuscript  was  entire  when  Governor 
Swain  first  saw  it.1  His  letter  to  Randall  and  the 
manner  in  which  the  Raleigh  Register  s  copy  of 
the  resolutions,  prepared  by  Dr.  Alexander  from 
the  manuscript  in  an  unknown  handwriting,  are 
treated  in  his  article  in  connection  with  the  certifi 
cate  to  the  Davie  paper,  evince  his  belief  that,  with 
the  exception  of  the  "  Alexandrian  measure,"  the 
Davie  paper  originally  contained  what  appears  in 
the  manuscript  in  an  unknown  handwriting.  But 
the  traces  of  original  work  by  the  unknown  writer 
are  so  discernible  even  in  his  last  two  resolutions 
as  to  lead  to  no  other  conclusion  than  that  the  two 
papers  could  not  have  been  identical  with  respect  to 
these  resolutions,  as  Professor  Phillips  says  they 
were,  if  the  unknown  writer's  was  of  later  date  than 
the  Davie  paper  and  never  in  the  elder  Alexander's 
hands.  It  is  indeed  remarkable  that  the  resolutions 

1  Phillips  to  P.  B.  Means,  May  20,  1879, 


168        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

missing  from  the  mutilated  Davie  paper  were  the 
very  ones  which  contain  most  of  the  expressions 
borrowed  from  Jefferson's  Declaration,  and  that  one 
of  those  which  remained,  the  last,  was  the  one  most 
like  its  parallel  in  John  McKnitt  Alexander's  notes. 
We  have  seen,  however,  that  the  last  resolution  of 
the  notes  and  the  last  of  the  anonymous  paper  might 
be  expected  to  be  found  resembling  each  other  more 
closely  than  any  others. 

A  week  before  the  date  of  Professor  Phillips's 
letter  to  Randall,  Governor  Swain  wrote  Randall 
in  answer  to  a  request  for  a  statement  of  his  views 
on  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  or  permission  to 
publish  his  letters  to  Bancroft.1  As  the  subject  was 
soon  to  be  treated  by  himself  and  Dr.  Francis  L. 
Hawks  in  the  latter's  History  of  North  Carolina, 
he  did  not  feel  at  liberty  to  comply.  With  respect 
to  the  original  Davie  paper  he  wrote: 

You  remark  that  the  main  question,  so  far  as  Mr.  Jefferson 
is  concerned,  is  this  :  "  Is  the  Alexander  copy  of  the  Mecklen 
burg  Resolutions  genuine?"  The  paper  is  unquestionably  genu 
ine.  I  have  it  before  me,  in  the  well-known  hand-writing  of 
John  McKnitt  Alexander.  But  what  is  it?  It  is  not  the  record 
of  the  Mecklenburg  Committee  that  perished  in  the  fire  which 
consumed  Mr.  Alexander's  home  in  April,  1800;  and  this  paper 
bears  date  in  the  following  September.  It  is  not  a  transcript, 
therefore,  of  the  original  record.  If  it  be  the  copy  of  a  copy, 
the  inquiry  presents  itself,  of  that  copy:  How  authenticated? 
Where,  when,  and  by  whom  taken?  Does  it  purport  to  be  a 
copy,  or  is  it  simply  upon  the  face  of  it  the  most  accurate 
narrative  which  Mr.  Alexander's  memory  could  supply  of  the 
transactions  to  which  it  relates  ? 

1  Swain  to  Randall,  Chapel  Hill,  April  6,  1858,  in  Tompkins,  History 
of  Mecklenburg  County,  ii,  53-54;  copied  from  the  Draper  MSS. 


The  Davie  Copy  169 

The  results  of  the  investigations  made  by  the 
North  Carolina  legislative  committee  of  1830-31, 
published  in  July,  1831,  in  the  State  Pamphlet, 
afford  ample  proof  that  as  much  of  the  mutilated 
Davie  paper  as  remained  when  it  was  unearthed, 
which  seems  to  have  been  more  than  Professor 
Phillips  found  in  1853,  agreed  in  every  respect  with 
the  manuscript  in  an  unknown  handwriting.  The 
report  of  the  committee  strangely  omitted  to  men 
tion  John  McKnitt  Alexander's  certificate  to  the 
Davie  paper.  This  has  led  some  to  believe  that 
the  committee  never  saw  the  original  paper,  and 
that  it  took  the  younger  Alexander's  word  for  its 
statements  about  the  paper.  But  the  editors  of  the 
State  Pamphlet  reprinted  under  "A"  the  document 
published  in  the  Raleigh  Register  of  April  30,  1819, 
and  under  "B"  this  certificate  and  note : 

State  of  North  Carolina, 
Mecklenburg  County. 

I,  Samuel  Henderson,  do  hereby  certify  that  the  paper  an 
nexed  was  obtained  by  me  from  Maj.  William  Davie  in  its 
present  situation,  soon  after  the  death  of  his  father,  Gen.  Wil 
liam  R.  Davie,  and  given  to  Doct.  Joseph  McKnitt  by  me.  In 
searching  for  some  particular  paper,  I  came  across  this,  and, 
knowing  the  hand-writing  of  John  McKnitt  Alexander,  took 
it  up  and  examined  it.  Maj.  Davie  said  to  me  (when  asked 
how  it  became  torn)  his  sisters  had  torn  it,  not  knowing  what 
it  was. 

Given  under  my  hand  this  25th  Nov.,  1830. 

SAM.  HENDERSON. 

NOTE. — To  this  certificate  of  Doct.  Henderson  is  annexed 
the  copy  of  the  paper  A,  originally  deposited  by  John  McKnitt 
Alexander  in  the  hands  of  Gen.  Davie,  whose  name  seems  to 
have  been  mistaken  by  Mr.  Jefferson  for  that  of  Gov. 


1 70         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Caswell.  See  preface,  pages  5,  and  6.  This  paper  is  somewhat 
torn,  but  is  entirely  legible,  and  constitutes  the  "  solemn  and 
positive  proof  of  authenticity  "  which  Mr.  Jefferson  required, 
and  which  would  doubtless  have  been  satisfactory,  had  it  been 
submitted  to  him. 

Dr.  Henderson's  certificate  refers  to  the  original 
Davie  paper  as  the  one  to  which  it  was  annexed, 
and  the  note's  statement  that  it  is  annexed  to  the 
"copy  of  the  paper  A"  must  be  construed  to  have 
reference  to  that  copy  of  "  A."  This  is  confirmed  by 
Governor  Stokes,  who  says  in  the  preface  to  the 
State  Pamphlet,  written  for  him  by  Governor  Swain: 
"  this  identical  copy,  known  by  the  writer  of  these 
remarks  to  be  in  the  handwriting  of  John  McKnitt 
Alexander,  one  of  the  secretaries  of  the  Mecklen 
burg  meeting,  is  now  in  the  Executive  Office  of 
this  State.  (See  Dr.  Henderson's  certificate,  B.)" 
Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander's  certificate  to  his 
father's  notes  and  the  manuscript  in  an  unknown 
handwriting,  like  Dr.  Henderson's,  is  dated  Meck 
lenburg  county,  November  25,  1830,  and  both  were 
no  doubt  sent  to  the  legislative  committee  on 
that  day  with  the  documents  to  which  they  refer. 
Alexander  said  in  his  certificate :  "  As  to  the  full 
sheet  being  in  an  unknown  hand  write,  it  matters 
not  who  may  have  thus  copyed  the  original  record. 
by  comparing  the  copy  deposited  with  Genl.  Davie 
they  two  will  be  found  so  perfectly  the  same,  so  far  as 

his  is  preserved,  that  no  imposition  is  possible 

the  entire  sheet  is  most  probably  a  copy  taken  long 
since  from  the  original  for  some  person,  corrected  by 
J no.  McKnitt  Alexander,  and  now  sent  on."  Since 
the  committee  said  it  examined  all  documents  which 


The  Davie  Copy  171 

were  accessible,  we  must  believe  that  it  was  after 
making  the  comparison  thus  invited  that  it  con 
cluded  that  the  Davie  paper  originally  contained  all 
that  appears  in  the  manuscript  in  an  unknown  hand 
writing  ;  and  the  honesty  of  Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt 
Alexander  can  no  longer  be  questioned.  The  cor 
rections,  interlineations,  and  erasures  in  the  manu 
script  in  an  unknown  handwriting  are  in  keeping 
with  its  character  as  a  draft  of  the  Davie  copy,  but 
certainly  out  of  place  in  a  paper  fabricated  to  pass 
as  a  transcript  of  an  original  record. 

The  story  of  the  2oth  of  May,  1775,  was  told  by 
John  McKnitt  Alexander  to  many  persons  after  he 
wrote  his  rough  notes  in  1800.  Any  evidence  that 
this  date  was  known  as  the  date  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  before  the  publication  made  in  1819  is 
thus  accounted  for.  We  have  seen  that  it  is  con 
firmed  by  no  evidence  up  to  the  time  of  Alexander's 
writing.  It  has  been  suggested  that  he  recollected 
that  date  because  May  2Oth,  Old  Style,  is  the  same 
as  May  3ist,  New  Style,  and  that  the  Julian  calen 
dar,  which  was  abolished  in  England  in  1752,  may 
have  been  used  by  some  persons  in  the  frontier 
county  of  Mecklenburg  as  late  as  1775,  which  fact 
Alexander  forgot.  At  some  time  after  the  Davie 
copy  was  written  Alexander  related  the  story  of  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration  to  Judge  Duncan  Came 
ron,  an  eminent  North  Carolina  jurist.  He  in 
formed  Cameron  that  he  had  given  a  copy  of  the 
declaration  to  General  Davie,  and  said,  "  The  docu 
ment  is  safe."1  This  incident  has  led  some  to  be- 

1  Gov.  Graham's  Address,  51;  Dr.  Hawks' s  Lecture  85. 


172        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

lieve  that  the  Davie  paper  was  an  extract  from 
an  original  record.  On  June  i,  1809,  at  the  com 
mencement  exercises  of  Sugar  Creek  Academy, 
three  miles  from  Charlotte,  a  pupil  recited  an  ad 
dress  containing  a  paragraph  relating  to  the  Meck 
lenburg  Declaration  which  was  evidently  prepared 
from  the  account  in  the  manuscript  in  an  unknown 
handwriting,  perhaps  by  Alexander  himself.  This 
is  the  address  published  in  the  Raleigh  Minerva  of 
August  10,  1809,*  to  which  Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt 
Alexander  refers  in  his  certificate  to  the  manuscript 
in  an  unknown  handwriting.  He  no  doubt  found 
the  newspaper  among  his  father's  papers.  Sugar 
Creek  Academy  was  conducted  by  the  Rev.  Samuel 
C.  Caldwell,  a  son-in-law  of  John  McKnitt  Alex 
ander,  and  his  pupil,  the  youthful  orator,  is  believed 

1  A  copy  of  this  newspaper  is  now  in  possession  of  a  family  descended 
from  its  publisher,  William  Boylan.  I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  A.  S.  Salley,  Jr., 
for  a  full  copy  of  the  address  printed  therein.  The  following  is  the  refer 
ence  to  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  : 

"On  the  igth  of  May  1776,  a  day  sacredly  exulting  to  every  Mecklen 
burg  bosom,  two  delegates  duly  authorised  from  every  militia  company  in 
this  county  met  in  Charlotte.  After  a  cool  and  deliberate  investigation  of 
the  causes  and  extent  of  our  differences  with  G.  Britain,  and  taking  a  view 
of  the  probable  result;  pledging  their  all  in  support  of  their  rights  and 
liberties  ;  they  solemnly  entered  into  and  published  a  full  and  determined 
declaration  of  Independence,  renouncing  forever  all  allegiance,  depen 
dence  on  or  connection  with  Great  Britain  ;  dissolved  all  judicial  and  mili 
tary  establishments  emanating  from  the  British  crown  ;  established  others 
on  principles  correspondent  with  their  declaration,  which  went  into  imme 
diate  operation  :  All  which  were  transmitted  to  Congress  by  express,  and 
probably  expedited  the  general  declaration  of  Independence.  May  we  ever 
act  worthy  of  such  predecessors."  A  comparison  of  this  passage  with  the 
historical  note  in  the  manuscript  in  an  unknown  handwriting  shows  that  the 
facts  it  states  were  derived  from  that  note.  A  foot-note  to  the  address  says 
that,  as  it  was  not  "first  intended  for  publication,  extracts  were  not 
noted." 


The  Davie  Copy  173 

to  have  been  James  Wallis, 1  son  of  the  Rev.  James 
Wallis,  another  son-in-law  of  John  McKnitt  Alex 
ander.  The  Rev.  James  Wallis  was  at  the  head  of 
a  school  at  Providence  settlement,  near  Charlotte.2 
His  son  Joseph  of  Chapel  Hill,  Texas,  saidinalet- 
ter  published  in  the  National  Intelligencer  of  Au 
gust  13,  1857,  that  he  remembered  seeing  his  father 
stamp  on  Williamson's  History  of  North  Carolina 
because  it  did  not  contain  a  carefully  prepared  ac 
count  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  by  John  Mc 
Knitt  Alexander.  A  former  student  at  the  school 
of  the  Rev.  James  Wallis  informed  William  A. 
Graham  in  1875  that  he  heard  John  McKnitt  Alex 
ander,  on  the  occasion  of  a  visit  of  a  month  at  Provi 
dence  in  1813,  relate  the  circumstances  of  the  declar 
ation  of  May  20,  i775-3  John  McKnitt  Alexander 
died  J  uly  i o,  1817.  During  the  last  five  or  six  years 
of  his  life  he  was  nearly  blind  and  very  infirm.4 

Thus  through  John  McKnitt  Alexander  did  the 
myth  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Indepen 
dence,  which  had  its  rise  in  the  Revolutionary 
period,  gain  wider  credence  in  Mecklenburg  county, 
and  thus  was  the  way  paved  for  the  unanimity  with 
which  men  accepted  the  document  published  in  1819 
as  genuine  and  authentic. 

1  Geo.  W.  Graham  :    The  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  33-35. 

2  Our  Living  and  Our  Dead,  iii,  193  ;  Foote's  Sketches  of  North  Carolina 
248,  250. 

3  GOTJ.  Graham's  Address,  51-52. 

4  Geo.   W.  Graham:     The  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  114  ;  copied  from 
Lyman  C.  Draper's  manuscript  work  on   the  Mecklenburg  Declaration. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE    MARTIN     AND    GARDEN    COPIES 

RECENT  advocates  of  the  authenticity  of  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration  admit  that  the  Davie 
copy  was  written  from  memory  in  1800  by  John 
McKnitt  Alexander,  but  claim  that  it  is  " fundamen 
tally  correct,"  as  Alexander  certified  it  to  be.  The 
authentic  copy,  they  argue,  is  to  be  found  in 
Frangois  Xavier  Martin's  History  of  North  Caro 
lina,  published  in  New  Orleans  in  1829,  and  in  the 
second  series  of  Alexander  Garden's  Anecdotes  of  the 
American  Revolution,  published  in  Charleston,  S.  C., 
in  1828.  It  is  in  form  an  emendation,  with  an  ad 
ditional  resolution,  of  the  series  published  in  1819^ 
or  Davie  copy.  Having  seen  from  John  McKnitt 
Alexander's  rough  notes  that  he  had  no  recollection 
of  the  phraseology  of  the  document,  whatever  it  was, 
which  he  understood  to  be  a  declaration  of  inde 
pendence,  and  knowing  that  the  Davie  copy  was 
constructed  from  those  notes,  we  might  be  justified 
in  dismissing  without  inquiry  a  paper  which  is  for 
the  most  part  literally  the  same  as  the  Davie  copy. 
But  the  testimony  of  Frangois  Xavier  Martin  is 
cited  to  prove  that  he  obtained  his  copy  before 
1800,  the  year  in  which  the  Davie  copy  was  written. 
Although  Martin's  history  appeared  ten  years 

174 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       175 

after  the  resolutions  were  published  in  the  Raleigh 
Register,  the  author  states  in  his  preface  that  his 
work  was  written  between  1791  and  1809,  when  he 
was  a  resident  of  North  Carolina.  In  1809  he  was 
appointed  a  Federal  judge  in  Mississippi,  and  a 
year  later  transferred  to  Louisiana.  He  had  hoped, 
according  to  his  preface,  to  resume  the  work  he 
began  in  North  Carolina,  but,  because  of  ill  health 
and  the  demands  of  public  duties  upon  his  time, 
"  The  determination  has  been  taken,"  he  said,  "  to 
put  the  work  immediately  to  press  in  the  condition 
it  was  when  it  reached  New  Orleans :  this  has  pre 
vented  any  use  being  made  of  Williamson's  History 
of  North  Carolina  [published  in  1812],  a  copy  of 
which  did  not  reach  the  writer's  hands  till  after  his 
arrival  in  Louisiana."  In  his  lecture  before  the 
New  York  Historical  Society  in  1852,  the  Rev. 
Francis  L.  Hawks  testified  from  his  conversations 
with  Judge  Martin  that  Martin  obtained  the  Meck 
lenburg  resolutions  "  in  manuscript,  from  the  west 
ern  part  of  North  Carolina,  and  procured  them,  as 
he  did  most  of  his  other  materials,  before  the  year 
1800."  *  In  his  address  at  Charlotte  on  May  20, 
1857,  Dr.  Hawks  stated  that  he  particularly  ques 
tioned  Judge  Martin  as  to  the  source  whence  he 
procured  his  copy,  and  that  Martin  told  him  "  not 
from  Alexander,"  but  from  some  one  in  the  western 
part  of  North  Carolina,  prior  to  1800.  Martin  in 
formed  him  in  the  last  year  of  his  life,  he  said,  that 
he  did  not  give  a  copy  to  Alexander  Garden,  or 
even  know  that  Garden  had  printed  the  same  reso- 

1  Cooke,  62-63. 


i/6        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

lutions.  Dr.  Hawks  gave  more  details  in  1857  than 
he  did  in  1852,  but  he  seems  to  have  cautiously 
omitted  on  the  second  occasion  to  say  whether 
Martin  told  him  that  he  obtained  his  copy  in  manu 
script  or  printed  form.1 

While  Martin  may  not  have  added  any  original 
matter  to  his  History  of  North  Carolina  after  his 
arrival  in  Louisiana,  it  can  be  demonstrated, we  be 
lieve,  that  the  Mecklenburg  resolutions  and  accom 
panying  narrative  printed  in  his  work  were  written 
after  1819,  and  that  they  did  not  reach  the  hands 
of  Martin  or  Garden  until  1821  or  later.  Martin's 
preface  may  be  accounted  for  as  containing  un 
guarded  statements  intended  to  explain  the  careless 
manner  with  which  the  work  was  written  and  the 
author's  failure  to  make  use  of  Williamson's  history. 
Martin's  statements  to  Dr.  Hawks  were  made  in 
1846,  or  shortly  before,  when  Martin  was  in  his 
eighty-fifth  year,  totally  blind,  and  his  memory 
"  somewhat  impaired,"  according  to  one  who  knew 
him  intimately.  It  is  most  likely  that  leading  ques 
tions,  the  remoteness  of  the  circumstance  of  which 
he  spoke,  and  the  fact  that  he  was  the  author  or 
compiler  of  thirty-seven  volumes,2  led  him  to  con 
fuse  the  Mecklenburg  resolutions  with  some  other 
paper.  After  reading  the  graphic  sketch  of  Martin 
in  his  dotage  written  by  Charles  Gayarre,3  one  can 

1  The  principal  parts  of    the   address  were  published  in  the  Charlotte 
Democrat,  May  26,  1857,  and  reprinted  in  the  Charlotte  Daily  Observer, 
May  20,  1906. 

2  Prof.  F.  M.  Hubbard  in  the  N.  C.  Univ.  Mag.,  October,  1852,  350; 
and  H.  A.  Bullard's  Discourse  on  the  Life  and  Character  of  the  Hon. 
Francois  Xavier  Martin  (1847),  29. 

3  Fernando  De  Lemos.     Truth  and  Fiction  (New  York,  1875). 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies        1 77 

scarcely  hold  Martin  responsible  for  any  statements 
made  by  him  at  that  period.  If  this  be  not  the  true 
explanation,  then  Martin  deliberately  lied.  It  has 
been  shown  that  he  made  false  statements  in  his 
History  of  North  Carolina,  to  prove  a  theory,  when 
authentic  facts  were  actually  before  him.1  In  1842, 
Governor  Swain  wrote  Martin  requesting  to  be  in 
formed  when  and  by  whom  his  copy  of  the  Mecklen 
burg  resolutions  was  furnished,  but  his  letter  was 
ignored.2 

Martin's  History  of  North  Carolina  is  a  compila 
tion  which  has  no  pretensions  to  anything  higher 
than  a  mere  chronological  arrangement  of  materials, 
with  no  attempt  to  set  forth  events  in  any  other 
relation.  Documents  of  the  Revolutionary  period 
are  copied  into  it  nearly  word  for  word,  but  without 
quotation  marks.  The  account  of  the  Mecklen 
burg  Declaration  opens  Chapter  XI  of  the  second 
volume,  the  last  chapter  of  the  work.  Chapter  X, 
which  precedes,  records  events  from  the  meeting  of 
the  Continental  Congress  in  September,  1774,  to 
September,  1775.  The  account  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  should  therefore  have  been  incorpo 
rated  in  this  chapter  in  order  to  follow  the  plan  of 
the  work.  No  event  other  than  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  which  occurred  during  the  period  cov 
ered  by  this  chapter  is  recorded  elsewhere.  In  its 
position  at  the  beginning  of  the  succeeding  chapter 

1  Stephen  B.  Weeks :    Southern  Quakers  and  Slavery  (Johns  Hopkins 
Univ.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Polit.  Science,  extra  vol.  xv.),  32-33, 

9  Swain  to  B.  J.  Lossing,  December  20,  1851.      Transcript  in  Bancroft 
MSS.,  N.  Y.  Pub.  Lib. 
12 


1 78        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

it  stands  wholly  unrelated  to  the  accompanying 
narrative.  Chapter  X  closes  with  an  account  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  Provincial  Congress,  and 
the  last  words  are :  "  The  Congress  rose  on  the 
1 9th  of  September  "  (i  775).  The  chronological  rec 
ord  is  resumed  in  Chapter  XI  with  an  account  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  Continental  Congress  in  the 
same  month,  which  opens  with  the  statement  that 
"The  Continental  Congress  met  on  the  i3th  of 
September."  Between  these  two  sentences  is  in 
serted  the  account  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration, 
which  recites  incidents  which  occurred  from  March, 
1775,  to  the  middle  of  the  Revolutionary  War. 
The  most  reasonable  inference  from  these  facts  is 
that  the  latter  sentence  originally  opened  Chapter 
XI,  and  that  the  account  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  reached  the  author's  hands  after  the 
work  was  completed,  and  was  inserted  where  it 
would  not  necessitate  any  change  in  the  text.  This 
is  confirmed  by  the  palpable  ignorance  of  a  declara 
tion  of  independence  by  Mecklenburg  county  which 
Martin  exhibits  in  the  last  two  chapters.  In 
Chapter  X  he  mentions  the  violent  resolutions  of 
the  Committees  of  Wilmington  and  New-Bern,  but 
has  not  a  word  to  say  about  the  declaration  of  in 
dependence  which  is  alleged  to  have  emanated 
about  the  same  time  from  Mecklenburg.  In  Chap 
ter  XI  he  speaks  of  the  receipt  of  the  news  of 
the  Declaration  of  Independence  from  Philadelphia 
with  no  comment  on  a  previous  declaration  by  a 
county  of  North  Carolina.  "  Thus,"  he  says,  in 
connection  with  the  Declaration  of  July  4,  1776, 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       1 79 

"  ended  the  royal  government  in  the  province  of 
North  Carolina,  .  .  ."  At  the  end  of  each  of 
these  last  two  chapters  Martin  cites  "Records. — 
Magazines. — Gazettes"  as  his  sources  of  informa 
tion. 

Having  seen  that  Martin's  history  bears  internal 
evidence  which  seems  to  show  that  the  Mecklenburg 
resolutions  and  accompanying  narrative  were  in 
serted  at  the  beginning  of  the  last  chapter  after  the 
work  was  completed,  we  will  inquire  into  the  history 
of  the  document  which  we  hold  to  be  the  original 
Martin  copy.  The  Raleigh  Register  of  Friday, 
August  13,  1819,  published  the  following  editorial 
announcement :  "  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  In 
dependence.  — The  public  will  doubtless  be  gratified 
to  learn  that  Colonel  WILLIAM  POLK,  of  this  city, 
(who  was  present  at  the  meeting  in  Mecklenburg 
County  when  the  Declaration  of  Independence  was 
agreed  upon  in  May,  1775)  is  preparing  for  publi 
cation  some  further  information  in  relation  to  that 
Declaration.  We  understand  that  the  Colonel  will 
give  the  names  of  the  Delegates,  and  an  account  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  Committees  subsequently, 
until  a  regular  government  was  established ;  and 
correct  some  misstatements  in  the  publication  al 
ready  made  on  this  subject  in  the  Register  of  the 
3<Dth  of  April  last,  and  which  has  lately  been  the 
subject  of  remark  in  Northern  papers."  Although 
completed  in  a  few  days  after  this  announcement 
was  made,  Colonel  Folk's  narrative  did  not  appear 
in  the  Raleigh  Register.  It  was  sent  by  him  to  his 
intimate  friend  Judge  Archibald  DeBow  Murphey, 


i8o        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

of  Haw  River,  N.  C.,  at  whose  instance  it  was  pre 
pared,  with  the  following  letter l : 

Raleigh,  August  18,  1819. 
My  dear  Sir, 

It  has  not  been  in  my  power  to  bestow  as  much  time  on 
the  subjects  mentioned  in  your  memorandum  of  the  i6th  ult. 
as  I  could  have  wished,  and  what  I  have  written  is  so  crudely 
put  together,  without  form,  grammar  and  orthography,  with 
numberless  interlineations  &  erasures,  that  I  fear  you  will  not 
be  able  [to]  glean  any  thing  worth  your  observations.  I  have 
been  too  much  hurried  in  my  preparation  for  Tennessee  to 
give  to  any  thing  else  much  of  my  time. 

I  am  not  sufficiently  acquainted  with  the  Biography  of  Gen. 
Davie  to  give  you  such  an  account  of  him  as  would  be  suf 
ficiently  interesting ;  nor  am  I  well  enough  acquainted  with 
the  history  of  the  establishment  of  the  present  boundary  be 
tween  the  States  of  N  &  S°  Carolina  to  say  any  thing  worthy 
of  the  subject. 

The  History  of  our  University  :  you  are  in  possession  of 
all  I  could  say  on  that  subject. 

I  set  out  on  Sunday  for  Nashville,  to  be  gone  I  do  not 
know  how  long.  I  wish  you,  my  Dr  Sir,  much  health  & 
happiness.  very  respectfully, 

Will:  Polk. 

[Addressed  :  A.  D.  Murphey,  Esq.] 

This  letter  shows  that  Colonel  Folk's  narrative 
was  an  original  composition  written  at  the  request 
of  Judge  Murphey,  and  that  Judge  Murphey  ex 
pected  to  "  glean  "  from  it  something  worthy  of  his 
"  observations,"  that  is,  to  prepare  something  for 
publication  on  the  subject  which  it  treated.  The 

1  The  original  letter  and  narrative  are  in  the  Emmet  Collection,  N.  Y- 
Pub.  Lib.  (Em.  1493.)  They  were  purchased  by  Dr.  Thomas  Addis  Em 
met  in  1889  from  an  autograph  dealer  of  New  York  who  obtained  the  bulk 
of  the  papers  left  by  Judge  Murphey  in  Hillsboro,  N.  C. 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       181 

Raleigh  Register  editorial  also  shows  that  it  was 
written  for  publication. 

Colonel  Folk's  account  of  the  Mecklenburg  De 
claration  has  not  been  found  in  a  complete  file  of 
the  Raleigh  Register  from  1819  to  1830,  nor  in 
broken  files  of  several  other  North  Carolina  news 
papers  which  are  now  extant.  The  original  manu 
script,  however,  bears  the  indorsement  "  published  " 
in  Judge  Murphey's  handwriting.  It  had  not 
been  published  up  to  February  18,  1820,  for  Judge 
Murphey  wrote  Colonel  Polk  on  that  date1:  "I 
hope  you  will  find  time  during  the  year  to  write 
much  more  on  the  subjects  on  which  you  favored 
me  with  several  sheets  during  the  last  summer. 
As  soon  as  I  can  get  my  business  arranged,  I  in 
tend  to  devote  much  of  my  time  to  these  subjects 
and  others  connected  with  the  History  of  the 
State."  In  the  fall  of  1820,  Murphey  conceived  the 
project  of  writing  a  great  historical  and  scien 
tific  work  on  North  Carolina,  a  work  for  which  his 
scholarship,  his  philosophic  mind,  his  facility  in 
composition,  and  his  love  for  the  State  of  North 
Carolina  pre-eminently  qualified  him.  He  collected 
much  material,  consisting  in  a  large  measure  of  the 
reminiscences  of  surviving  Revolutionary  officers, 
but  poverty  and  ill  health  ended  his  labors  about 
1828  and  carried  him  to  the  grave  in  February, 
1832.  In  January,  1821,  he  began  to  publish  in 
the  Hillsboro  Recorder  the  narratives  of  some  of 

1  The  original  letter  is  in  the  possession  of  the  writer,  who  has  a  large 
part  of  the  correspondence  of  Judge  Murphey  and  is  preparing  a  biography 
of  him.  See  his  sketch  of  Murphey  in  the  Biographical  History  of  N,  C.t 
iv.,  340-348. 


1 82         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

these  old  men.  This  newspaper  was  established 
at  Hillsboro,  about  fifteen  miles  from  Judge 
Murphey's  home,  in  February,  I82O,1  previous  to 
which  time  there  were  no  newspapers  published  in 
North  Carolina  west  of  Raleigh  for  a  number  of 
years.  It  appears  that  Colonel  Folk's  narrative  was 
published  in  this  paper.  Judge  Murphey  wrote 
General  Joseph  Graham,  July  20,  1821,  that  he 
published  in  the  Hillsboro  Recorder  in  March,  1821, 
an  "  account  '  of  the  first  Revolutionary  move 
ments,'  "  and  that  the  printer  "  made  a  mistake 
and  said,  '  in  the  United  States,'  instead  of  4  in 
this  State.'"2  As  the  opening  words  of  Colonel 
Folk's  narrative  are,  "  The  first  revolutionary  move 
ments  in  this  State  as  far  as  recollection  serves," 
and  as  the  original  manuscript  is  indorsed  by 
Colonel  Polk,  "  First  revolutionary  movements, 
&c.",  this  was  undoubtedly  the  narrative  to  which 
Judge  Murphey  referred.  Additional  evidence  is 
afforded  by  the  fact  that  he  wrote  Colonel  Polk 
on  July  24,  1821  :  "I  have  requested  Mr.  Heart, 
the  Editor  of  the  Hillsboro  Recorder,  to  send 
you  his  paper,  commencing  with  the  latter  part 
of  January." 3 

The  account  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  in 
Colonel  Folk's  manuscript  sketch  of  the  first  revolu- 

1  Raleigh  Register,  February  18,  1820. 

2  Col.  Rec.  of  N.  C.,  xix.,  975-978.     Cf.  N.  C.  Univ.  Mag.,  December, 
1854,  447-448. 

*  From  the  original  letter  in  the  writer's  possession.  A  very  incomplete 
file  of  the  Hillsboro  Recorder,  and  the  only  one  known  to  be  extant, 
is  in  the  possession  of  Miss  Alice  C.  Heartt,  of  Hillsboro,  N.  C.,  the 
granddaughter  of  the  editor.  Following  an  issue  of  January,  1821,  which 
announces  that  Judge  Murphey  would  contribute  a  series  of  letters,  there 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       183 

tionary  movements  in  North  Carolina  is  in  substance 
and  largely  in  form  the  same  as  that  which  appears 
in  Martin's  History  of  North  Carolina.  From  a 
comparison  of  the  two,  which  are  printed  below  in 
parallel  columns,  it  is  manifest  that  Martin  copied 
into  his  work  the  paper  which  Judge  Murphey  pre 
pared  from  the  Polk  manuscript  and  published  in 
the  lost  Hillsboro  Recorder  in  March,  1821.  There 
is,  of  course,  a  diversity  between  the  Polk  and 
Martin  accounts  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration, 
because  the  former  was  intended  only  as  a  basis  for 
Judge  Murphey's  publication  ;  and  he  no  doubt 
added  facts  bearing  upon  the  matter  which  had 
come  to  light  up  to  the  time  of  his  writing.  The 
new  data  were  contained  in  the  joint  certificate  of 
George  Graham,  William  Hutchison,  Jonas  Clark, 
and  Robert  Robison,  given  by  these  men  at  the 
request  of  Colonel  Polk,  and  published  in  the 
Raleigh  Register  of  February  18,  1820,  and  in  the 
testimony  of  James  Jack  and  Francis  Cummins, 
published  in  the  same  paper  on  May  26,  1820. 
The  few  facts  recorded  in  the  Martin  account 
which  are  not  in  Colonel  Polk's  are  all  stated  in 
this  published  testimony.  The  Polk  recension 
of  the  Mecklenburg  resolutions  does  not  agree 
verbatim  with  Martin's  nor  with  that  published  in 
the  Raleigh  Register  a  few  months  before  it  was 

is  a  gap  in  the  file  extending  to  late  in  that  year.  It  would  seem  from 
Judge  Murphey's  letter  to  General  Graham,  in  which  he  refers  to  his 
articles  in  the  Hillsboro  Recorder,  that  they  were  copied  by  a  Fayetteville, 
N.  C.,  newspaper.  The  first  of  these  articles  was  copied  into  the  New- 
bern  Centinel,  of  September  8,  1821.  It  was  written  over  the  name  of 
"Florian." 


1 84        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

written ;  but  it  contains  several  words  and  phrases 
of  the  Martin  copy  which  do  not  appear  in  the 
Raleigh  Register  version.  "  The  resolutions  of  the 
Mecklenburg  delegates,"  wrote  Colonel  Polk,  "  is 
taken  from  a  manuscript  copy  given  by  Dr.  Jos. 
McKnitt  Alexander  of  Mecklenburg.  /  cannot 
vouch  for  their  being  in  the  words  of  the  Committee 
who  framed  them,  but  they  are  essentially  so."  It 
will  appear  below  that  Judge  Murphey,  being  thus 
informed  that  the  resolutions  were  not  an  extract 
from  an  original  record  and  virtually  told  that  he 
might  take  liberties  with  them,  made  emendations 
in  several  places  where  he  thought  that  the  original 
text  had  not  been  preserved,  and  constructed  a 
sixth  resolution  of  which  Colonel  Polk  gave  the 
substance. 

Polk.1  Martin. 

.  .  .  But  in  no  part  of  the  In  the  western  part  of  the 

Province  was  there  such  oppo-  province,  the  people  were  still 

sition  to  the  usurped  acts  of  eager  in  their  resistance.     In 

the  British  Gov*,  nor  so  great  the   months    of    March    and 

a  love  of  liberty  and  country  April,  1775,  the  leading  men 

manifested  as   in    the    Coun-  in  the  county  of  Mecklenburg 

ty  of   Mecklenburg  :     In    the  held  meetings  to  ascertain  the 

months   of    March    &    April  sense  of   the  people,   and   to 

1775  the  influential  characters  confirm  them  in  their  oppo- 

in  the  County  held  meetings  sition    to    the    claim   of    the 

to  ascertain  the  sense  of  the  parliament    to    impose   taxes 

people  &  to  reason  with  them  and     regulate     the     internal 

on  the  propriety  of  opposition  policy   of   the   colonies.      At 

to  the  right  claimed   by  the  one  of  those  meetings,  when 

British  Parliment    to  impose  it   was   ascertained,   that    the 

1  The  parts  of  Folk's  manuscript  preceding  and  following  the  extract 
printed  here  will  be  found  in  the  Appendix. 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       185 


taxes  and  regulate  the  internal 
policy  of  the  Colonies — at  one 
of  these  meetings  when  it  was 
ascertained  the  People  were 
prepared  to  meet  their  wishes 
if  was  agreed  that  Thomas 
Polk  then  Col.  comd*  of  the 
County;  should  issue  an  order 
directed  to  each  Captain  of 
the  Regiment,  requiring  them 
to  call  a  company  meeting  & 
to  elect  two  delegates  from 
each  company  to  represent 
them  in  Committee  at  Char 
lotte  on  the  19^  of  May  1775 
giving  to  the  Delegates  full  & 
ample  power  to  adopt  such 
measures  as  to  them  should 
seem  best  calculated  to  pro 
mote  the  common  cause  ;  to 
defend  the  country  against 
British  usurpation  &  slavery, 
and  aid  our  Brethren  in  Massa 
chusetts —  Agreeably  to  the 
order  aforesaid ;  Delegates 
from  every  Captains  comp? 
in  the  County  (&  which  at 
that  time  comprehended  the 
County  of  Cabarrus)  met  in 
Charlotte  with  powers  as  am 
ple  as  had  been  required. 
When  the  Delegates  had  taken 
their  seats  in  the  C  House 
was  nominated  &  ap 
pointed  Chairman,  &  Doctor 
Ephraim  Brevard  Secretary. 
It  had  been  agreed  by  those 
at  whose  instance  the  con- 


people  were  prepared  to  meet 
their  wishes,  it  was  agreed, 
that  Thomas  Polk,  then  colonel 
commandant  of  the  county, 
should  issue  an  order  directed 
to  each  captain  of  militia,  re 
questing  him  to  call  a  com 
pany  meeting  to  elect  two 
delegates  from  his  company, 
to  meet  in  general  committee, 
at  Charlotte,  on  the  iQth  of 
May;  giving  to  the  delegates 
ample  power  to  adopt  such 
measures,  as  to  them,  should 
seem  best  calculated  to  pro 
mote  the  common  cause  of 
defending  the  rights  of  the 
colony,  and  aiding  their 
brethren  in  Massachusetts. 
Colonel  Polk  issued  the  order, 
and  delegates  were  elected. 
They  met  in  Charlotte,  on  the 
day  appointed.  The  forms 
of  their  proceedings  and  the 
measures  to  be  proposed  had 
been  previously  agreed  upon, 
by  the  men  at  whose  instance 
the  committee  were  assem 
bled.  The  Reverend  Heze- 
kiah  Jones  Balch,  Dr.  Ephraim 
Brevard,  and  William  Kennon, 
esq.  an  attorney  at  law,  ad 
dressed  the  committee,  and 
descanted  on  the  causes  which 
had  led  to  the  existing  contest 
with  the  mother  country,  and 
the  consequences  which  were 
to  be  apprehended,  unless  the 


1 86        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 


vention  met  that  the  Rev*? 
Hezekiah  James  Balch,  Doct' 
Eph.  Brevard  &  W?  Ken- 
non  Esq  an  Att?  and  man  of 
considerable  oratorial  powers, 
should  open  the  bussiness 
by  discanting  on  the  causes 
which  had  led  to  the  existing 
contest  &  the  result,  which 
would  inevitably  follow,  unless 
met  by  a  firm  manly  &  ener 
getic  resistance. — to  aid  the 
end  which  the  leaders  had  in 
view,  it  fortunately  happened 
that  on  the  day  of  the  meet 
ing  the  news  of  the  action 
at  Lexington  reached  them; 
fought  on  the  19*  of  April ; 
which  gave  a  fair  &  fortunate 
opportunity  for  those  who 
were  inclined  to  urge  the  pro 
priety  of  disolving  the  union 
between  the  mother  country 
&  the  Colonies  &  to  assume 
a  Republican  form  of  Gov* 
which  was  the  great  object  of 
the  Leaders.  The  speakers 
acquitted  themselves  on  the 
several  subjects  on  which 
they  spoke  remarkably  well  & 
with  great  effect  not  only  on 
the  Delegates,  but  a  numerous 
assemblage  of  the  People  of 
the  County  led  together  from 
the  novelty  of  the  meeting — 
when  after  a  few  observations 
by  several  of  the  popular  Dele 
gates  ;  it  was  echoed  from 


people  should  make  a  firm 
and  energetic  resistance  to 
the  right  which  parliament 
asserted,  of  taxing  the  colo 
nies  and  regulating  their  in 
ternal  policy. 


On  the  day  on  which  the 
committee  met,  the  first  in 
telligence  of  the  action  at 
Lexington,  in  Massachusetts, 
on  the  i  pth  of  April,  was 
received  in  Charlotte.  This 
intelligence  produced  the 
most  decisive  effect.  A  large 
concourse  of  people  had  as 
sembled  to  witness  the  pro 
ceedings  of  the  committee. 
The  speakers  addressed  their 
discourses,  as  well  to  them,  as 
to  the  committee,  and  those 
who  were  not  convinced  by 
their  reasoning,  were  influ 
enced  by  their  feelings,  and 
all  cried  out,  "  let  us  be  inde 
pendent  !  let  us  declare  our 
independence  and  defend  it 
with  our  lives  and  fortunes  !  " 
A  committee  was  appointed 
to  draw  up  resolutions.  This 
committee  was  composed  of 
the  men  who  planned  the 
whole  proceedings,  and  who 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       187 


every  quarter  let  us  be  Inde 
pendent  ;  let  us  declare  our 
selves  free  and  Independent 
and  we  will  defend  it  with 
our  lives  &  fortunes  —  A 
Committee  was  immediately 
raised  for  the  purpose  of 
drafting  Resolutions  in  obedi 
ence  to  the  wish  of  the  Dele 
gates  &  the  People  present — 
who  soon  returned  with  the 
following  which  had  been 
prepared  some  days  before 
from  the  pen  of  Doctor 
Brevard  : 

Resolved  Thai,  whosoever 
directly  or  indirectly  abets1 
or  in  any  way  form  or  man 
ner,  countenances  2the  unchar- 
tered  and  dangerous  invasion 
of  our  rights  as  claimed  by 
G*  Britain;  is  an  enemy  to  this 
country,  to  America  &  to  the 
inherent  rights8  of  Man. 

Resolved,  That  We  the  Citi 
zens  of  Mecklenburg  County 
do  hereby  dissolve  the  political 
bonds  which  have  connected 
us  with*  the  mother  country; 
and  do  hereby  absolve  our 
selves  from  all  allegiance  to 
the  British  Crown,  and  ab 
jure  all  political  connection 
contract  or  association  with 


had,  already,  prepared  the 
resolutions  which  it  was  in 
tended  should  be  submitted 
to  the  general  committee. 
Doctor  Ephraim  Brevard  had 
drawn  up  the  resolutions 
sometime  before,  and  now 
reported  them,  with  amend 
ments,  as  follows : 


"Resolved^  That  whosoever 
directly  or  indirectly  abets,  or 
in  any  way,  form  or  manner, 
countenances  the  invasion  of 
our  rights  as  attempted  by  the 
parliament  of  Great  Britain, 
is  an  enemy  to  his  country,  to 
America  and  the  rights  of 
man. 

"  Resolved,  That  we,  the  citi 
zens  of  Mecklenburg  county, 
do  hereby  dissolve  the  po 
litical  bonds  which  have  con 
nected  us  with  the  mother 
country;  and  absolve  our 
selves  from  all  allegiance  to 
the  British  crown,  abjuring 
all  political  connexion  with 
a  nation,  that  has  wantonly 


1  The  Raleigh  Register  copy  has  *«  abetted." 

'The  Raleigh  Register  copy  has  "  countenanced." 

8  The  Raleigh  Register  copy  has  "  inherent  and  inalienable  rights.'* 

4  The  Raleigh  Register  copy  has  "  to  "  instead  of  "with." 


1 88         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 


that  Nation  who  have  wan 
tonly  trampled  on  our  rights 
and  liberties  and  inhumanly 
shed  the  innocent  blood  of 
our  American J  Patriots  at  Lex 
ington. 

Resolved,  That  we  do  here 
by  declare  ourselves  a  free 
and  independent  People  are 
&  of  right  ought  to  be  a  sov 
ereign  &  self  governing  asso 
ciation  under  the  power  of 
God  &  the  general  Congress2; 
to  the  maintainance  of  which 
Independence  we  solemnly 
pledge  to  each  other,  our  mu 
tual  cooperation,  our  lives  our 
fortunes  &  our  most  sacred 
honor. 

Resolved,  That  as  we  now 
acknowledge  the  existence  and 
controul  of  no  law  or  legal 
officer  civil  or  military,  within 
this  county;  we  do  hereby 
ordain  and  adopt  as  a  rule  of 
life,  all  and  each  of  our  for 
mer  laws,  wherin  neverthe 
less  the  Crown  of  G.  B.  never 
can  be  considered  as  holding 
rights  priviledges  immunities 
or  authority  therein. 

Resolved,  That  and  it9  is 
further  decreed  that  all,  each 
and  every  Military  Officer  in 


trampled  on  our  rights  and 
liberties,  and  inhumanly  shed 
the  innocent  blood  of  Ameri 
cans  at  Lexington. 


"  Resolved,  That  we  do  here 
by  declare  ourselves  a  free  and 
independent  people,  that  we 
are  and  of  right  ought  to  be  a 
sovereign  and  self-governing 
people,  under  the  power  of 
God  and  the  general  congress; 
to  the  maintenance  of  which 
independence  we  solemnly 
pledge  to  each  other,  our 
mutual  co-operation,  our  lives, 
our  fortunes  and  our  most 
sacred  honor. 


"  Resolved,  That  we  do  here 
by  ordain  and  adopt  as  rules 
of  conduct,  all  and  each  of  our 
former  laws,  and  the  crown  of 
Great  Britain  cannot  be  con 
sidered  hereafter  as  holding 
any  rights,  privileges  or  im 
munities  amongst  us. 

"  Resolved,  That  all  officers 
both  civil  and  military,  in  this 
county,  be  entitled  to  exer- 


1  The  Raleigh  Register  copy  has  "of  American." 

2  The  Raleigh  Register  copy  has  ' '  under  the  control  of  no  power  other 
than  that  of  our  God  and  the  General  Government  of  the  Congress." 

8  The  Raleigh  Register  copy  has  "  That  it." 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       189 


this  County  is  hereby  rein 
stated  to  his  former  command 
and  authority,  he  acting  con 
formably  to  these  regulations; 
and  that  every  member  pres 
ent  of  this  delegation  shall 
henceforth  be  a  civil  officer 
viz  a  Justice  of  the  Peace  in 
the  Character  of  a  Committee 
man,  to  issue  process,  hear 
and  determine  all  matters  of 
controversy  according  to  said 
adopted  Laws,  to  preserve 
Peace,  union1  &  harmony  in 
s?  County;  and  to  use  every 
exertion  to  spread  the  love  of 
liberty  £  of  country8  throuoght 
America  untill  a  more  general 
&  organised  goverment  be 
established  in  this  Province. 

Resolved,  That  the  forego  ing 
resolutions,  be  adopted  which 
was  accordingly  done  unani 
mously,  &  that  the  Delegates 
sign  their  names  to  the  same. 

It  was  also  resolved,  that  a 
copy  of  the  resolutions  should 
be  transmitted  by  express  to 
the  Gen!  Congress  to  be 
laid  before  that  body  by  the 
representatives  from  the  Pro 
vince  Viz  Caswell  Hooper  & 
Hughes  —  a  committee  was 
appointed  to  select  a  proper 
person  to  be  the  bearer  of  the 


cise  the  same  powers  and 
authorities  as  heretofore;  that 
every  member  of  this  delega 
tion  shall  henceforth  be  a 
civil  officer,  and  exercise  the 
powers  of  a  justice  of  the 
peace,  issue  process,  hear  and 
determine  controversies  ac 
cording  to  law,  preserve  peace, 
union  and  harmony  in  the 
county,  and  use  every  exer 
tion  to  spread  the  love  of  lib. 
erty  and  of  country,  until  a 
more  general  and  better  organ 
ized  system  of  government  be 
established. 


"Resolved,  That  a  copy  of 
these  resolutions  be  trans 
mitted,  by  express,  to  the 
president  of  the  continental 
congress,  assembled  in  Phil 
adelphia,  to  be  laid  before 
that  body." 

These  resolutions  were 
unanimously  adopted  and  sub 
scribed  by  the  delegates. 


1  The  Raleigh  Register  copy  has  '*  peace  and  union." 
8  The    Raleigh  Register  copy  has   "the    love  of  country  and  fire  of 
freedom." 


1 90        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 


Resolutions  who  engaged  the 
services  of  Cap*  James  Jack  a 
Citizen  of  Charlotte;  who  ac 
cordingly  set  off  and  delivered 
the  same  —  The  President  of 
Congress  returned  by  Cap? 
Jack  a  polite  answer  to  the 
address  accompanying  the  res 
olutions,  in  which  he  highly 
approved  of  the  measures  en 
tered  into  by  the  Delegates 
of  Mecklenburg;  but  deemed 
it  premature  to  submit  the 
resolutions  to  Congress  —  The 
Representatives  from  the  Pro 
vince  also  sent  a  joint  letter 
complimentary  to  the  people 
of  Mecklenburg  &  applauding 
their  zeal  in  the  common  cause 
&  recommending  the  same 
good  order  &  perseverance 
which  had  marked  their  for 
mer  conduct  should  be  kept  up 
&  persevered  in.  [They  stated 
also,  "  that  the  time  would 
soon  be,  when  the  whole  Con 
tinent  would  follow  our  exam 
ple." — (Joint  certificate  of 
Geo.  Graham  and  others, 
Raleigh  Register,  Feb.  18, 
j&?o.)>  "When  the  resolu 
tions  were  finally  agreed  on 
they  were  publicly  proclaimed 
from  the  court-house  door" 


James  Jack,  then  of  Charlotte, 
but  now  residing  in  the  state 
of  Georgia,  was  engaged  to 
be  the  bearer  of  the  resolu 
tions  to  the  president  of  con 
gress,  and  directed  to  deliver 
copies  of  them  to  the  dele 
gates  in  congress  from  North 
Carolina.  The  president  re 
turned  a  polite  answer  to  the 
address  which  accompanied 
the  resolutions,  in  which  he 
highly  approved  of  the  meas 
ures  adopted  by  the  delegates 
of  Mecklenburg;  but  deemed 
the  subject  of  the  resolutions 
premature  to  be  laid  before 
congress.  Messrs.  Caswell, 
Hooper  and  Hewes,  forward 
ed  a  joint  letter,  in  which  they 
complimented  the  people  of 
Mecklenburg  for  their  zeal  in 
the  common  cause,  and  rec 
ommended  to  them,  the  strict 
observance  of  good  order; 
that  the  time  would  soon 
come,  when  the  whole  conti 
nent  would  follow  their  exam- 
pie. 

On  the  day  that  the  resolu 
tions  were  adopted  by  the  del 
egates  in  Charlotte,  they  were 
read  aloud  to  the  people,  who 
had  assembled  in  the  town, 


1  The  joint  certificate  of  George  Graham,  Wm.  Hutchison,  Jonas 
Clark,  and  Robert  Robison  (State  Pamphlet)  was  given  at  the  request  of 
Colonel  Wm.  Polk  and  substantiates  his  statements  regarding  the  actors  in 
the  transaction. 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       191 


— (Captain  Jack's  certificate ', 
Raleigh  Register,  May  26, 
1820),  **  under  the  shouts  and 
huzzas  of  a  very  large  assem 
bly  of  the  people." — (Graham 
and  others.}  "  I  was  then  solic 
ited  to  be  the  bearer  of  the 

proceedings and    in 

passing  through  Salisbury,  the 
General  Court  was  sitting  — 
at  the  request  of  the  court  I 
handed  a  copy  of  the  resolu 
tions  to  Col.  Kennon,  an  attor 
ney,  and  they  were  read  aloud 
in  open  court.  Major  Wil 
liam  Davidson,  and  Mr. 
Avery,  an  attorney,  called  on 
me  at  my  lodgings  the  even 
ing  after,  and  observed  they 
had  heard  of  but  one  person, 
(a  Mr.  Beard)  but  approved 
of  them."— (Captain  Jack's 
certificate}^ 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing 
resolutions,  a  number  of  other 
resolutions  &  bye  laws  were 
adopted  —  Courts  of  Justice 
were  held  by  &  under  the 
direction  of  the  Delegates  — 
for  some  months  these  Courts 
held  their  sittings  at  Char 
lotte,  but  for  the  better  con 
venience  of  the  people  two 
other  places  were  selected  at 
which  &  at  Charlotte  the  court 
met  alternately. 

A  Committee  of  safety  was 
selected  from  the  whole  Dele- 


and  proclaimed  amidst  the 
shouts  and  huzzas,  as  express 
ing  the  feelings  and  de 
termination  of  all  present. 
When  captain  Jack  reached 
Salisbury,  on  his  way  to  Phil 
adelphia,  the  general  court 
was  sitting,  and  Mr.  Kennon, 
an  attorney  at  law,  who  had 
assisted  in  the  proceedings  of 
the  delegates  at  Charlotte, 
was  then  in  Salisbury.  At 
the  request  of  the  judges,  Mr. 
Kennon  read  the  resolutions 
aloud  in  open  court,  to  a  large 
concourse  of  people;  they 
were  listened  to  with  attention 
and  approved  by  all  present. 


The  delegates  at  Charlotte 
being  empowered  to  adopt 
such  measures,  as  in  their 
opinion  would  best  promote 
the  common  cause,  established 
a  variety  of  regulations  for 
managing  the  concerns  of  the 
country.  Courts  of  justice 
were  held  under  the  direction 
of  the  delegates.  For  some 
months  these  courts  were  held 
at  Charlotte  ;  but  for  the  con 
venience  of  the  people,  (for 
at  that  time  Cabarrus  formed 
part  of  Mecklenburg,)  two 


192         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 


gation,  to  whom  was  given 
power  to  examine  all  persons 
brought  before  them  who  were 
charged  or  suspected  of  being 
inimical  to  the  cause  of  free 
dom  &  the  safety  of  the 
Country  —  This  Committee 
was  delegated  with  authority 
from  the  Gen!  Delagation 
to  send  the  Military  of 
the  County  to  bring  before 
them  persons  living  in  adja 
cent  Counties  charged  with 
toryism  or  inimical  to  the 
cause  of  Liberty,  &  they  in 
the  plentitude  of  this  power 
sent  into  Lincoln  &  Rowan 
Counties  &  and  brought  from 
them  divers  persons  charged 
as  aforesd —  to  such  as  shewed 
penitence  &  took  an  oath  to 
support  the  cause  of  Liberty 
&  the  Country  were  set  at 
Liberty — others  were  sent 
under  guard  into  S?  Carolina 
for  safe  keeping  —  among  the 
latter  were  John  Dunn  & 
BenjJ1  Boothe  Boote  two  Law 
yers  of  Salisbury.  —  It  was 
unquestionably  owing  to  the 
early  exertions  of  this  band  of 
Patriots  &  to  the  measures 
entered  into  at  the  meeting  of 
the  Delegates  on  the  19*  of 
May  ;  that  the  future  unanim 
ity  &  exertions  of  the  Peo 
ple  of  Mecklenburg  in  the 
cause  of  liberty  &  indepen- 


other  places  were  selected^ 
and  the  courts  were  held  at 
each  in  rotation.  The  dele 
gates  appointed  a  committee 
of  their  body,  who  were  called 
"  a  committee  of  safety,"  and 
they  were  empowered  to  ex 
amine  all  persons  brought  be 
fore  them  charged  with  being 
inimical  to  the  common  cause, 
and  to  send  the  military  into 
neighboring  counties  to  arrest 
suspected  persons.  In  the 
exercise  of  this  power,  the 
committee  sent  into  Lincoln 
and  Rowan  counties,  and  had 
a  number  of  persons  arrested 
and  brought  before  them. 
Those  who  manifested  peni 
tence  for  their  toryism,  and 
took  an  oath  to  support  the 
cause  of  liberty  and  of  the 
country,  were  discharged.  Oth 
ers  were  sent  under  guard 
into  South  Carolina  for  safe 
keeping.  The  meeting  of  the 
delegates  at  Charlotte  and  the 
proceedings  which  grew  out 
of  that  meeting,  produced  the 
zeal  and  unanimity  for  which 
the  people  of  Mecklenburg 
were  distinguished  during  the 
whole  of  the  revolutionary 
war.  They  became  united  as 
a  band  of  brothers,  whose 
confidence  in  each  other,  and 
the  cause  which  they  had 
sworn  to  support,  was  never 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       193 

dence,  was  so  remarkable  —    shaken  in  the  worst  of  times. 

it  united  them  into  a  band  of 

Brothers,  whose  confidence  in 

each  other  &  the  cause  they 

had  sworn   to    support  ;    was 

never    shaken  ;   even    in   the 

worst  of  times  — 

The  truth  is  apparent  on  the  face  of  these  papers. 
It  is  confirmed  by  another  account  of  the  Mecklen 
burg  Declaration,  written  by  Judge  Murphey,  which 
contains  passages  substantially  the  same  as  some  of 
these  found  in  the  Polk  manuscript  and  literally  the 
same  as  passages  in  the  Martin  account.  This  is  the 
revised  Polk  narrative  in  condensed  form,  and  prob 
ably  the  account  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration 
which  Judge  Murphey  intended  to  use  in  his  history 
of  North  Carolina.  It  was  undoubtedly  written  be 
fore  Martin's  book  was  published,  in  the  autumn  of 
1829,  for  Murphey  had  by  that  time  virtually  aban 
doned  his  historical  work.  An  extract  from  the 
original  manuscript,  which  cannot  now  be  found,  was 
published  by  John  H.  Wheeler,  the  North  Carolina 
historian,  in  Our  Living  and  Our  Dead,  for  January, 
1875.  Wheeler  prefaced  it  as  follows:  "In  our 
explorations  of  the  field  of  history  we  have  met  the 
unpublished  manuscript  of  an  able,  learned  and  dis 
tinguished  son  of  North  Carolina,  now  dead,  late 
Archibald  D.  Murphey.  He  was  in  the  councils  of 
the  State  from  1812-18,  and  for  some  years  a  judge. 
He  was  a  devotee  to  history  and  collected  a  large 
mass  of  information  which  he  did  not  live  to  publish. 
We  extract  the  following."  Wheeler  does  not  re 
produce  the  resolutions  in  the  Murphey  manuscript, 

13 


194        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

but  says  at  the  place  where  they  should  appear, 
"  Here  are  quoted  the  identical  resolutions  of  May 
20,  already  given."  The  resolutions  referred  to  are 
those  printed  in  the  State  Pamphlet ;  but  Wheeler 
is  perhaps  as  inaccurate  a  historian  as  ever  wrote 
when  the  facts  were  actually  before  him.  It  is  not 
unlikely,  however,  that  Judge  Murphey  decided  to 
use  the  Davie  (Raleigh  Register}  copy  of  the  reso 
lutions  in  his  history  of  North  Carolina  instead  of 
the  polished  edition  which  he  published  in  1821. 

Dr.  George  W.  Graham  and  other  recent  pro-decla 
ration  writers  tell  us  there  was  still  another  historian 
who  copied  the  document  from  the  much  discussed 
Cape-Fear  Mercury,  or,  at  least,  from  a  paper  of 
earlier  date  than  the  Davie  copy.  Major  Alexander 
Garden,  who  served  under  "Light  Horse  Harry" 
Lee,  published  nearly  a  year  before  Martin's  history 
appeared,  in  his  Anecdotes  of  the  American  Revolu 
tion,  a  copy  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  which 
agrees  verbatim  et  literatim  with  Martin's  but  for 
six  minor  discrepancies.  The  discrepancies  are  to 
be  attributed  to  mistakes  in  printing.or  transcribing. 
Garden's  copy  has  two  words  less  than  Martin's,  two 
words  different  from  the  corresponding  ones  in 
Martin's,  a  word  misplaced,  and  a  word  written  in 
the  plural  which  is  in  the  singular  in  Martin's.  Gar 
den's  story  of  the  declaration  is  little  more  than  an 
abridgment  of  Martin's,  whole  sentences  in  the  two 
narratives  being  literally  the  same.  Both  were 
derived  therefore  from  a  common  source.  We  con 
clude  with  Dr.  Graham  that  this  applies  likewise 
to  the  resolutions.  Garden  also  drew  upon  an  article 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies        195 

on  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  which  appeared  in 
the  Charleston  Mercury  of  July  4,  1828,  over  the 
name  of  "  Guilford."  His  book  was  published  in 
Charleston,  where  he  resided,  in  November  follow 
ing.  The  Garden  "anecdote,"  a  part  of  the  ab 
breviated  Murphey  narrative  printed  by  John  H. 
Wheeler,  and  extracts  from  the  opening  and  closing 
paragraphs  of  "  Guilford's  "  article  are  placed  below 
in  parallel  columns.  A  glance  will  show  that  the 
former  are  both  condensed  forms  of  the  revised 
Polk  narrative  which  Martin  reproduced,  and  that 
"  Guilford's "  article  furnished  Garden  with  addi 
tional  matter.1  Passages  in  the  Murphey  and 
Garden  narratives  which  are  to  be  found  verbatim  et 
literatim,  or  nearly  so,  in  Martin's,  are  italicized. 

Murphey  and  Guilford.  Garden. 

Boston  has  been  emphatically  It  is  a  compliment  richly  due 
styled  the  cradle  of  American  to  our  sister  State  of  North- 
Liberty;  and  to  Massachusetts  Carolina,  to  mention  an  im- 
doubtless  belongs  the  merit  of  portant  fact,  which,  however 
having  given  the  first  im-  redounding  to  her  credit,  is 
pulse  to  that  spirit  of  resistance  even  at  this  period  but  little 

1  "Guilford"  prepared  his  story  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  from 
"J.  McKnitt's"  publication.  His  resolutions  are  slightly  different  from 
"J.  McKnitt's,"  but  they  were  undoubtedly  intended  to  be  a  true  copy. 
For  "  Guilford's  "  article  the  writer  is  indebted  to  Mr.  A.  S.  Salley,  Jr., 
who  also  pointed  out  its  resemblance  to  the  Garden  narrative  and  ascer 
tained  the  month  of  the  publication  of  Garden's  book  by  these  facts  :  "In 
the  first  part  of  the  book  there  is  a  letter  from  Major  Garden  to  Gen. 
Thomas  Pinckney,  dated  October  12,  1828,  and  to  this  Major  Garden  adds 
a  note  referring  to  the  death  of  Gen  Pinckney.  Gen,  Pinckney  died  on  the 
2d  of  November.  The  copyright  to  the  book,  printed  on  the  reverse  of 
the  title-page,  was  issued  by  the  clerk  of  the  United  States  District  Court 
at  Charleston  on  the  I7th  of  November.  The  Library  of  the  University 
of  South  Carolina  has  a  copy  dated  '  November  27,  1828 '  on  the  cover." 


196        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 


which  led  to  the  emancipation 
of  the  American  Colonies.  .  .  . 
Yet,  while  Massachusetts  and 
Virginia  equally  contend  for 
the  credit  of  having  first  given 
birth  to  the  spirit  of  the  Revo 
lution,  and  while  we  accord  to 
each  the  merit  which  is  espe 
cially  due  to  them ;  to  the  State 
of  North  Carolina  must  be 
conceded  the  honour  of  hav 
ing  first  adopted  a  formal  and 
decisive  declaration  of  Inde 
pendence.  The  History  of  this 
important  event  never  having 
been  given  to  the  world  ex 
cept  in  a  cursory  manner  by 
the  learned  Doctor  Caldwell 
in  his  life  of  Greene,  the  fact 
itself  is  little  known  and  but 
imperfectly  understood,  tho' 
its  authority  is  established  both 
by  the  existence  of  the  min 
utes  of  the  meeting  which  are 
still  extant  in  the  handwriting 
of  the  Author  and  mover  of 
these  resolutions,  which  have 
been  happily  observed  by  a 
near  relative  of  his,  as  well  as 
by  the  testimony  of  a  few  of 
the  survivors  of  the  revolution, 
who  still  reside  in  that  part  of 
the  country. — ["  Guilford"'] 

In  no  part  of  the  province 
of  North  Carolina  was  there 
such  zealous  opposition  to  the 
pretensions  of  the  mother 
country  as  was  in  the  county 


known  to  the  citizens  generally 
of  the  United  States. 

The  townof  Boston  hasbeen, 
with  great  propriety,  styled 
"the  Cradle  of  the  Revolu 
tion."  The  opposition  of  its 
inhabitants  to  the  encroach 
ments  of  Great  Britain  first 
roused  the  Colonists  to  a  just 
sense  of  the  injuries  medita 
ted  against  their  liberties,  and 
fixed  their  resolution  to  repel 
force  by  force.  Yet  it  will 
forever  redound  to  the  honour 
of  North-Carolina,  that  it  was 
among  her  people  that  the 
bold  idea  of  Independence 
was  first  conceived  and  pro 
claimed  to  the  world.  The 
tyrannical  measures  pursued 
by  the  officers  of  the  Crown : 
the  iniquities  practised  by 
those  of  the  courts  of  justice, 
produced  a  general  spirit  of 
discontent  as  early  as  the  year 
1768. 


But  it  was  in  Mecklenburg 
County  that  a  zealous  opposi 
tion  to  the  pretensions  of  the 
mother  country,  and  a  deter 
mination  to  resist  the  agres- 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       197 


of  Mecklenburg  in  the  months 
of  March  and  April,  1775. 
The  leading  men  in  the  county 
held  meetings  to  ascertain  the 
sense  of  the  people  and  to  con 
firm  them  in  their  opposition  to 
the  claims  of  Parliament  to  im 
pose  taxes  and  regulate  the  in 
ternal  policy  of  the  colony.  At 
one  of  these  meetings  it  was 
agreed  that  Thomas  Polk,  the 
Colonel  Commandant  of  the 
county,  should  issue  an  order 
directed  to  each  captain  of  mili 
tia  to  call  a  company  meeting  and 
elect  two  delegates  from  each 
company  to  meet  in  general  com 
mittee  at  Charlotte,  on  May 
29->  2775i  giving  these  delegates 
ample  power  to  adopt  such  meas 
ures  as  to  them  should  seem  best. 
The  committee  met.  Dr. 
Brevard  and  William  Kennon 
addressed  the  meeting.  The 
question  was  formally  put 
whether  it  was  then  expedient 
for  the  people  of  Mecklenberg 
county  to  declare  themselves 
independent.  It  was  decided 
unanimously  in  the  affirmative. 
A  committee  was  appointed  to 
present  resolutions,  which  were 
as  follows:  [" Here"  says 
John  H.  Wheeler,  "  are  quoted 
the  identical  resolutions  of 
May  2Oth,  already  given. 
Judge  Murphey  continues  :  "  ] 
— [Murphey.] 


sions  of  power  were  first 
decidedly  manifested.  The 
leading  men  held  meetings  to 
ascertain  the  sense  of  the  people, 
and  to  confirm  them  in  their 
opposition  to  the  claim  of  Par 
liament  to  impose  taxes,  and 
regulate  the  internal  policy  of 
the  Colony.  The  Post  Com 
mandant  of  the  county  was, 
on  one  occasion,  directed  to 
issue  orders  to  each  captain 
of  the  militia,  to  elect  two  dele 
gates  from  his  company,  to 
meet  in  general  committee  at 
Charlotte,  the  better  to  adopt 
such  measures  as  should  seem 
best  calculated  to  promote  the 
common  cause,  of  defending  the 
right  of  the  Colony,  and  of  aiding 
their  brethren  in  Massachusetts. 
The  order  was  issued,  and  dele 
gates  elected,  who  met  at  Char 
lotte  on  the  igth  of  May,  1775. 
On  that  day,  the  first  intelli 
gence  of  the  commencement 
of  hostilities  at  Lexington,  was 
received  by  the  committee. 
Its  effect  was  decisive.  T  h  e  u  n  i- 
versal  cry  was,  "  Let  us  be  in 
dependent — let  us  declare  our 
independence  and  defend  it 
with  our  lives  and  fortunes." 
Resolutions  were  immediately 
drawn  up  and  adopted.  Dr. 
Brevard,  who  framed  them, 
had  the  honour  to  report  them, 
also — they  were  to  this  effect : 


98        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 


The  singular  identity  of  lan 
guage  and  sentiment  of  these 
Resolutions,  with  those  of  the 
Declaration  of  Independence 
drawn  up  by  Mr.  Jefferson, 
more  than  a  year  afterwards, 
afford  a  subject  of  envious  re 
mark.  In  force  and  elegance 
of  expression,  and  in  purity  of 
principle,  they  are  alike  hon 
ourable  to  the  distinguished 
gentleman  who  framed  them, 
as  they  are  to  the  conven 
tion,  which  in  the  language  of 
the  Resolutions  "  pledging  to 
each  other  their  mutual  Coop 
eration,  their  lives,  and  their 
fortunes,  and  most  sacred  hon 
our,"  in  their  wisdom  adop 
ted  and  under  favor  of  God 
and  their  consciences,  at  the 
hazard  of  their  lives,  their 
liberties,  and  all  that  was  dear, 
supported.  The  events  which 
followed  this  memorable  dec 
laration  in  that  section  of  the 
country,  which  was  alike  the 
subject  of  foreign  invasion  and 
civil  war,  would  afford  abun 
dant  interesting  material  for 
the  historian  and  we  are  much 
gratified  to  perceive  that  a 
history  of  the  State  is  now  in  a 
state  of  forwardness,  under  the 


[Here  is  inserted  an  almost 
perfect  reproduction  of  the 
Martin  copy  of  the  declara 
tion^ 

I  think  it  scarcely  possible 
to  read  these  Resolutions, 
without  perceiving  how  strong 
the  similarity  of  sentiment  ex 
pressed  in  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  introduced  by 
Mr.  Jefferson,  at  an  after  pe 
riod  into  Congress.  Even  the 
expressions  are,  in  many  in 
stances,  literally  the  same,  in 
so  much  as  to  give  conviction, 
that  the  Mecklenburg  Resolu 
tions  were  constantly  in  view, 
when  the  Committee  of  Con 
gress  drew  that  momentous 
document,  which  we  consider 
as  the  palladium  of  our  lives 
and  liberties. 

This  early  manifestation 
of  patriotic  enthusiasm,  never 
knew  diminution ;  a  steadiness 
of  principle  characterized  the 
inhabitants  of  Mecklenburg 
county  throughout  the  whole 
war.  It  was  there  that  sup 
plies  were,  with  the  greatest 
liberality,  bestowed  on  the 
soldiers  fighting  the  battles  of 
their  country — that  the  hos 
pitals  were  best  protected,  and 
comforts  afforded  the  sick.  It 
was  there  that  the  enemy  met 
with  constant  and  decided  op 
position,  and  that  they  were 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies        199 

direction  of  a  gentleman  whose  so  incessantly  harassed  at  ev- 
talents  and  industry  amply  ery  turn,  and  in  every  situa- 
qualify  him  to  do  justice  to  the  tion  which  they  occupied,  that 
subject. — "Guilford."  Charlotte  was  emphatically 

styled   by    them — "the  Hor 
nets'  Nest." 

It  will  be  seen  that  Garden's  last  paragraph  is  a 
brief  summary  of  facts  stated  in  the  concluding  por 
tion  of  the  Polk  manuscript  and  mostly  omitted  by 
Martin  when  he  copied  Murphey's  published  ac 
count.  Murphey's  second  revision  of  the  Polk 
narrative,  which  he  seems  to  have  written  for  his 
proposed  history  of  North  Carolina,  contained  a 
fuller  statement  than  Garden  gave.  Wheeler's 
extracts  from  his  manuscript,  continued  from  where 
they  were  left  off,  are  as  follows1: 

The  resolutions  were  unanimously  adopted  and  subscribed  to  by 
all  the  delegates.  Captain  James  Jack,  then  of  Charlotte,  but 
since  of  Georgia,  was  engaged  as  the  bearer  to  the  President  of 
the  Continental  Congress,  and  directed  to  deliver  copies  to  (Zzswdh, 
Hooper,  and  Hewes,  the  delegates  to  Congress  from  North 
Carolina.  .  .  .  These  delegates  prudently  advised  that  no 
open  opposition  should  be  made  by  the  inhabitants  of  de 
tached  portions  of  the  country  before  the  proper  season,  when 
the  whole  would  rise  together.  This  advice,  dictated  by  wis 
dom,  was  observed  by  the  people  of  Mecklenburg,  and  it  was 
no  doubt  owing  to  this  fact  that  so  little  of  this  curious  his 
tory  is  known  to  the  world.  .  .  .  The  Declaration  of  Meck 
lenburg  derives  its  importance  from  its  consequences,  for  this 
event  not  only  influenced  but  determined  the  fate  of  the  Revo 
lution  in  the  Southern  States.  It  produced  that  zeal  and 
unanimity  for  which  the  people  of  Mecklenburg  and  Rowan  were 
distinguished  during  the  whole  contest.  They  became  united  as 
one  band  of  brothers,  had  confidence  in  the  cause  they  vowed  to  sup- 

1  The  italicized  portions  are  in  the  words  of  the  so-called  Martin  copy. 


200        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 


t)  which  faith  was  never  shaken  in  the  darkest  hour  of  the 
long  and  dubious  contest.  They  opposed  the  first  barrier  to  the 
British  forces  flushed  with  the  conquest  of  Georgia  and  South 
Carolina.  Gates  being  defeated,  there  was  not  a  Continental 
soldier  between  Camden,  South  Carolina,  and  Hillsboro'.  A 
mere  handful  of  the  brave  men  of  Mecklenburg  disputed  the 
possession  of  Charlotte,  and  while  there  the  pickets  and  forag 
ing  parties  of  the  invaders  were  constantly  fired  upon.  After 
Cornwallis'  retreat  from  Charlotte,  which  his  legionary  Colonel, 
Tarleton,  with  as  much  truth  as  wit,  pronounced  to  be  an 
agreeable  village,  but  a  decidedly  rebellious  place,  these  men, 
unawed  by  force  and  undismayed  by  reverses,  rapidly  re 
cruited  the  shattered  corps  of  Sumpter,  Davie,  and  Washing 
ton;  rallied  to  the  standard  of  Greene  and  fought  gallantly  at 
Cowpens,  Eutaw  and  elsewhere.  ...  It  thus  is  clear  that 
the  declaration  at  Charlotte  becomes  one  of  the  most  import 
ant  events  of  the  American  Revolution.  The  spirit  it  excited 
sustained  the  cause  in  the  Southern  States.  It  formed  a  nu 
cleus  around  which  valor  might  rally. 

If  further  evidence  were  wanting  in  order  to 
prove  that  Martin  and  Garden  copied  the  revised 
Polk  narrative  and  resolutions,  it  might  be  pointed 
out  that  both  of  these  men  were  friends  of  Colo 
nel  William  Polk,1  that  Martin  was  in  communica 
tion  with  Murphey  shortly  before  his  work  was 
published,  and  that  he  read  the  North  Carolina 
newspapers.  Martin  says  in  his  preface  that  he 
thought  of  abandoning  his  work  on  account  of 
the  following  circumstance  : 

"  The  public  prints  stated,  that  a  gentleman  of 
known  industry  and  great  talents,  who  has  filled  a 
very  high  office  in  North  Carolina,  was  engaged  in 
a  similar  work  ;  but  several  years  have  elapsed 

1  Geo.  W.  Graham  :    The  Mecklenburg  Declaration. 


The  Martin  and  Garden  Copies       201 

since,  and  nothing  favors  the  belief  that  the  hopes 
which  he  excited  will  soon  be  realized. 

"  This  gentleman  had  made  application  for  the 
materials  now  published,  and  they  would  have  been 
forwarded  to  him,  if  they  had  been  in  a  condition 
of  being  useful  to  any  but  him  who  had  collected 
them." 

No  one  but  Judge  Murphey  was  spoken  of  at  this 
time  as  the  author  of  a  forthcoming  history  of 
North  Carolina.  The  editor  of  the  Raleigh  Register 
said  in  his  issue  of  November  1 1,  1825  :  "If  Judge 
Martin  does  not  intend  to  finish  his  work,  it  is 
much  to  be  wished  that  his  materials  could  be  pro 
cured  and  placed  in  the  hands  of  Mr.  Murphey." 
On  seeing  the  announcement  of  the  publication  of 
Martin's  work,  he  said  (September  10,  1829)  that 
he  "  supposed  he  had  relinquished  his  intentions  on 
this  subject,  or  postponed  them,  in  view  of  the 
contemplated  work  by  Judge  Murphey."  In  an 
unpublished  review  of  Martin's  history,  Joseph 
Seawell  Jones,  the  historian,  stated  that  the  remarks 
in  Martin's  preface  referred  to  Judge  Murphey, 
with  whom  Jones  was  well  acquainted.  He  signifi 
cantly  said :  "  There  is  not  in  his  whole  book  a 
single  original  view  of  any  point  or  period  in  the 
history  of  the  State."1 

1  Jones's  manuscript,  bearing  his  signature,  is  in  the  Bancroft  Collection 
("  Am.  Colonies,"  vol.  i.),  in  the  N.  Y.  Pub.  Lib.  It  was  written  shortly 
after  the  publication  of  Martin's  work. 


CHAPTER   XI 

TESTIMONY    OF    THE    WITNESSES 

WE  have  traced  the  origin  of  the  myth  of  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Independence  and  of 
the  several  forms  of  the  declaration  which  is  al 
leged  to  have  been  adopted  May  20,  1775,  and  we 
have  treated  all  the  evidence  of  earlier  date  than 
1819,  tne  Year  m  which  that  document  was  first 
given  to  the  world  in  the  columns  of  the  Raleigh 
Register,  which  is  cited  in  support  of  its  authen 
ticity.  It  remains  to  make  a  critical  analysis  of  a 
neglected  part  of  the  testimony  of  the  aged  men 
who  stated  between  1819  and  1830  that  they  had 
been  present  in  Charlotte  when  a  declaration  of 
independence  was  agreed  upon.  Our  study  of  con 
temporaneous  records  has  shown  that  the  most 
significant  facts  which  were  associated  in  the  recol 
lection  of  these  men  with  the  passage  of  the  reso 
lutions  which  they  understood  to  be  a  declaration 
of  independence  are  peculiar  to  the  resolutions  of 
May  31,  1775.  Their  statements  concerning  the 
declaration  itself,  its  date,  and  the  disputed  secre 
taryship  of  the  meeting  that  is  alleged  to  have 
passed  it,  must  now  be  considered. 

In  virtue  of  the  proof  afforded  by  the  original 


Testimony  of  the  Witnesses          203 

Davie  paper  that  the  resolutions  published  in  1819 
proceeded  from  John  McKnitt  Alexander,  and  in 
virtue  of  the  testimony  which  he  published  in 
the  State  Pamphlet,  Governor  Montfort  Stokes,  of 
North  Carolina,  under  the  authority  and  direction 
of  the  General  Assembly,  affirmed  these  resolutions 
to  be  genuine  and  authentic.  It  is  difficult  to 
understand  how  John  McKnitt  Alexander's  cer 
tificate  to  the  Davie  paper  could  have  been  thus 
overlooked,  or  misconstrued  and  suppressed.  The 
certificate  could  not  have  been  missing  when  the 
Davie  paper  was  submitted  to  the  legislative  com 
mittee  of  1830-31,  for  Professor  Charles  Phillips, 
after  inspecting  it  in  1853,  said  that  the  certificate 
formed  the  "  conclusion  to  the  manuscript " — not  a 
separate  sheet.1  We  venture  to  suppose  that  Dr. 
Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander,  Governor  Stokes,  and 
the  legislative  committee,  wishing  to  view  the  mat 
ter  in  the  most  favorable  light,  judged  that  when 
John  McKnitt  Alexander  said  that  the  "  foregoing 
statement,  though  fundamentally  correct,  may  not 
literally  correspond  with  the  original  record,"  he 
referred  to  the  historical  statement  which  accom 
panied  the  resolutions  in  the  Davie  paper,2  and 
that  if  he  referred  also  to  the  resolutions,  he  meant 
that  they  were  taken  from  a  transcript  of  the  orig 
inal  record,  carelessly  made,  perhaps,  and  that  he 
would  not  vouch  for  their  literal  correctness,  be 
cause  he  could  not  compare  them  with  the  records. 

1  N.  C.  Univ.  Mag.,  May,  1853. 

2  John  H.  Wheeler  construes  the  certificate  thus  in  his  Reminiscences  of 
N.  C.,  266. 


204        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

The  manuscript  "  in  an  unknown  handwriting," 
from  which  Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander  pre 
pared  the  resolutions  published  in  1819,  and  which 
he  certified  in  1830  to  be  "most  probably  a  copy 
taken  long  since  from  the  original  for  some  per 
son — corrected  by  Jno.  McKnitt  Alexander,"  was 
"  so  perfectly  the  same  "  as  the  Davie  paper,  as  far 
as  the  latter  was  preserved,  that  the  genuineness 
and  authenticity  of  the  published  resolutions  was 
held  to  be  unquestionable. 

Not  one  of  the  thirteen  survivors  of  May,  1775, 
whose  testimony  appears  in  the  State  Pamphlet, 
manifests  the  slightest  knowledge  of  John  McKnitt 
Alexander's  certificate  to  the  Davie  paper.  During 
the  period  in  which  this  testimony  was  given,  the 
only  recorded  evidence  that  any  one  in  North  Caro 
lina  doubted  whether  the  published  resolutions  were 
verbally  correct  is  contained  in  some  lost  newspaper 
articles  by  an  unknown  writer,  published  about 
I83O,1  and  in  the  manuscript  narrative  of  the  four 
teenth  witness,  Colonel  William  Polk,  written  in 
August,  1819,  more  than  a  year  before  the  Davie 
paper  was  found.3  Those  among  the  aged  de- 

1  W.   H.   Foote,   Sketches  of  N.   C.,  207.     Foote's  statements  seem  to 
imply  North  Carolina  newspapers  of  1830. 

2  Evidences  of  prevailing  ideas  are  abundant.     In  an  address  delivered 
in  Mecklenburg,  July  5,  1824,  Dr.  M.  W.  Alexander  said  that  the  Alex 
ander  document  contained  "  the  proceedings  of  the  meeting  as  drawn  and 
certified  by  their  clerk."     A  writer  in  the  Charleston  Mercury  of  July  4, 
1828,  said  that  **  the  fact  itself  is  little  known  and  but  imperfectly  under 
stood,  tho'  its  authority  is  established  both  by  the  existence  of  the  minutes 
of  the  meeting  which  are  still  extant  in  the  handwriting  of  the  Author  and 
mover  of  these  resolutions,  which  have  been  happily  observed  [preserved] 
by  a  near  relative  of  his,"  etc. 


Testimony  of  the  Witnesses          205 

ponents  who  saw  the  resolutions  published  in  1819 
before  they  gave  their  testimony  were  betrayed 
into  the  error  of  believing  that  they  had  been 
copied  from  the  records  which  were  destroyed  in 
Alexander's  house  in  1800;  and  it  was  inevitable 
that  some  should  have  been  forced  to  believe  that 
the  historical  statement  which  accompanied  the  re 
solutions  was  prepared  by  Alexander  with  the  aid 
of  the  records,  and  that  others  should  have  ac 
cepted  and  accredited  as  true  anything  which  they 
did  not  distinctly  perceive  to  be  false.  Indeed,  the 
careless  reader  who  does  not  observe  that  the  his 
torical  statement  relates  events  which  occurred  long 
after  May  20,  1775,  might  suppose  that  the  entire 
paper,  being  dated,  in  the  usual  way,  "  North- 
Carolina,  Mecklenburg  County,  May  20,  1775,"  is 
an  official  report  made  on  that  day.  Here,  then, 
were  fourteen  men,  laboring  under  the  weight  of 
years,  who  were  called  upon  to  testify  on  the 
strength  of  mere  memory,  after  a  lapse  of  nearly 
a  half  century  or  more,  concerning  the  peculiar 
phraseology,  or  exact  import,  or  both,  of  a  series 
of  resolutions  which  most  of  them  had  heard  read 
but  once,  from  the  steps  of  the  courthouse  in 
Charlotte.  All  were  very  young  men  or  boys  in 
May,  1775,  and  likely  to  have  been  among  the 
first  who  transfigured  the  Mecklenburg  resolves 
of  May  31,  1775,  into  a  declaration  of  independence. 
Here  were  a  series  of  resolutions,  without  a  rival, 
which  purported  to  be  the  declaration  made  in 
May,  1775,  accompanied  by  a  narrative  of  events 
which  these  men  had  associated  with  the  resolutions 


206         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

which  they  had  in  mind.  The  document  was  cer 
tified  by  the  son  of  the  last  custodian  of  the  records 
of  May,  1775,  to  be  a  true  copy  of  papers  left  in 
his  hands  by  his  father,  and  the  greater  number  of 
the  aged  witnesses  were  virtually  told  that  these 
were  the  resolutions  which  they  had  heard  read, 
and  that  May  20,  1775,  was  their  date,  or  that 
John  McKnitt  Alexander,  their  late  honored  com 
patriot,  was  a  forger  and  a  liar.  All  gave  their 
testimony  in  answer  to  leading  questions.  And 
yet,  notwithstanding  the  strong  prepossessions 
under  which  they  labored,  the  paper  of  May  31, 
1775,  reasserted  its  hold  upon  their  memories  even 
in  their  statements  concerning  the  terms  of  the 
resolutions  which  they  called  a  declaration  of  in 
dependence. 

General  Joseph  Graham,  though  but  fifteen  years 
of  age  in  May,  1775,  described  the  great  meeting 
of  that  month  with  extraordinary  particularity. 
He  wrote  in  1830,  fifty-five  years  later,  at  the  re 
quest  of  Dr.  Joseph  McKnitt  Alexander.  The 
facts  to  which  he  certified  explode  the  very  hypo 
thesis  they  were  cited  to  confirm,  and  explain  the 
origin  of  the  remarkable  assumption  expressed  in 
the  preamble  of  the  May  3ist  resolves,  under 
which  these  resolves  proceeded.  General  Graham 
stated  that  one  of  the  "  reasons"  for  declaring  in 
dependence  was  "that  the  King  or  Ministry  had, 
by  proclamation  or  some  edict,  declared  the  Colo 
nies  out  of  the  protection  of  the  British  Crown." 
He  distinctly  recollected,  he  said,  that  after  a  com 
mittee  of  three  had  retired  from  the  courthouse  to 


Testimony  of  the  Witnesses          207 

draft  the  declaration,  a  member  of  the  Committee  of 
Safety  "  addressed  the  Chairman  as  follows:  '  If  you 
resolve  on  independence,  how  shall  we  be  absolved 
from  the  obligations  of  the  oath  we  took  to  be  true  to 
King  George  the  3d  about  four  years  ago,  after  the 
Regulation  battle,  when  we  were  sworn  whole 
militia  companies  together  ?  "  "  This  speech  pro 
duced  confusion,"  wrote  General  Graham.  "  Some 
said  it  was  nonsense ;  others  that  allegiance  and 
protection  were  reciprocal,"  and  that,  as  the  King 
had  declared  them  out  of  his  protection,  the  oath 
was  no  longer  binding.  The  "  reason  "  for  declar 
ing  independence  stated  by  General  Graham  is 
substantially  the  professed  "  reason  "  for  which  the 
Mecklenburg  committee  on  May  31,  1775,  refused 
to  support  any  government  under  the  crown  of 
Great  Britain.  The  preamble  of  the  May  3ist 
resolves  reads:  "  Whereas  by  an  Address  presented 
to  his  Majesty  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  in 
February  last,  the  American  colonies  are  declared 
to  be  in  a  state  of  actual  rebellion,  we  conceive 
that  all  laws  and  commissions  confirmed  by  or  de 
rived  from  the  authority  of  the  King  or  Parliament, 
are  annulled  and  vacated,  and  the  former  civil  con 
stitution  of  these  colonies,  for  the  present,  wholly 
suspended."  The  address  of  Parliament  referred 
to  was  presented  to  the  King  February  7,  1775.  It 
did  not,  as  General  Graham  recollected,  declare  the 
Colonies  out  of  the  protection  of  the  British  crown, 
but  only  that  "  a  part  of  your  Majesty's  subjects  in 
the  province  of  the  Massachusetts  Bay  have  pro 
ceeded  so  far  to  resist  the  authority  of  the  supreme 


208        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

legislature,  that  a  rebellion  at  this  time  actually 
exists  within  the  said  province  ;  and  we  see  with 
the  utmost  concern  that  they  have  been  counte 
nanced  and  encouraged  by  unlawful  combinations 
and  engagements  entered  into  by  your  Majesty's 
subjects  in  several  of  the  other  colonies,  .  .  ."  1 
It  is  evident  that  the  Mecklenburg  patriots  had 
some  strong  motive  which  is  not  apparent  on  the 
face  of  their  bold  resolves  for  giving  them  a  color 
of  legality  by  construing  the  sentence  of  rebellion 
passed  on  Massachusetts  to  fall  also  on  themselves. 
No  colony,  not  even  Massachusetts,  dared  to  ex 
press  the  conception  of  the  civil  status  created  for 
the  colonies  by  Parliament's  address  of  February 
7,  1775,  which  these  men  formulated.  General 
Graham's  testimony  shows  very  clearly  that  the 
preamble  of  the  May  3ist  resolves,  with  its  strained 
construction  of  that  address,  was  designed  prima 
rily  as  a  shield  for  the  tender  consciences  of  those 
who  took  the  oath2 "  to  be  true  to  King  George  the 
3d,"  as  he  describes  it,  which  was  exacted  by  Gov 
ernor  Tryon  after  the  Regulator  insurrection  in 
1771.  With  his  recollections  of  the  charge  of  re- 

1  Hansard's  Parliamentary  History  of  England,  xviii. ,  297. 

2  The  precise  terms  of  this  oath  are  unknown.     It  is  usually  spoken  of 
as  an  oath  of  allegiance,  but  it  must  have  been  something  more  than  that  in 
order  to  have  answered  its  purpose.     Prof.  Charles  Phillips,  who  had  access 
to  Governor  Swain's  great  collection  of  North  Caroliniana,  called  it  an  oath 
"  not  to  disturb  his  Majesty's  government  again"  (N.  C.  Univ.  Mag.,  May, 
1853).    Prof.  Wm.  E.  Dodd  speaks  of  it  in  his  Life  of  Nathaniel  M aeon  as 
an  "  iron-clad  oath  of  allegiance."     Rev.   Francis  L.   Hawks,  who  had 
richer  and  more  valuable  materials  than  any  other  North  Carolina  historian, 
says  that  it  was  an  oath  "  '  never  to  bear  arms  against  the  King,  but  to  take 
up  arms  for  him,  if  called  upon.'"     He  seems  to  have  quoted  the  words 
of  the  oath  itself." — Dr.  Hawks' s  Lecture,  Cooke,  63. 


Testimony  of  the  Witnesses          209 

bellion  and  consequent  suspension  of  royal  author 
ity,  which  practically  involved  a  suspension  of 
allegiance,  General  Graham  identified  the  principle 
of  the  reciprocity  of  protection  and  allegiance, 
which  was  commonly  urged  as  an  argument  for 
declaring  independence  after  the  King's  proclama 
tion  of  August  23,  1775,  declaring  many  subjects  in 
divers  parts  of  the  Colonies  to  be  in  open  and 
avowed  rebellion,  and  the  King's  assent  to  the  Act 
of  Parliament  declaring  them  out  of  his  protection.1 
While  General  Graham  stated  that  the  meeting 
which  adopted  the  supposed  declaration  was  held 
May  20,  1775,  and  that  the  resolutions  which  he 
heard  were  "  as  near  as  I  can  recollect,  in  the 
very  words  we  have  since  seen  them  several  times 
in  print,"  his  testimony  concerning  the  resolutions 
themselves,  as  well  as  concerning  a  variety  of  facts 
and  circumstances  attending  their  adoption  which 
we  have  already  considered,  prove  that  he  con 
founded  his  recollections  by  identifying  them  with 
the  simulated  document. 

The  testimony  of  John  Simeson  is  not  less  signifi 
cant  than  General  Graham's.  Simeson  was  twenty- 
one  years  old  when  the  event  of  which  he  wrote 
occurred.  After  conversing,  he  said,  "with  many 
old  friends  and  others,"  and  evidently  after  his 
mind  was  preoccupied  by  the  publications  made  on 
the  subject,  he  wrote  from  his  home  in  Mecklen- 
berg  county,  January  20,  1820 :  "  As  to  the  names 
of  those  who  drew  up  the  Declaration,  I  am  inclined 

1  Compare  Graham's  statement  with  the  opening  words  of  the  constitution 
of  N.  C. 
14 


210        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

to  think  Doctor  Brevard  was  the  principal,  from  his 
known  talents  in  composition.  It  was,  however,  in 
substance  and  form,  like  that  great  national  act 
agreed  on  thirteen  months  after.  Ours  was  towards 
the  close  of  May,  1 775.  In  addition  to  what  I  have 
said,  the  same  committee  appointed  three  men  to 
secure  all  the  military  stores  for  the  county's  use — 
Thomas  Polk,  John  Phifer  and  Joseph  Kennedy. 
I  was  under  arms  near  the  head  of  the  line,  near 
Col.  Polk,  and  heard  him  distinctly  read  a  long 
string  of  Grievances,  the  Declaration  and  Military 
Order  above."  John  Simeson  recollected  nearly 
the  precise  terms  of  the  military  order  which  forms 
the  last  of  the  "  long  string  "  of  resolutions  which 
he  was  struggling  to  recall.  The  true  "  Mecklen 
burg  Declaration  of  Independence  "  concludes  as 
follows  : 

"  XX.  That  the  Committee  appoint  Colonel 
Thomas  Polk,  and  Doctor  Joseph  Kenedy,  to  pur 
chase  300  Ib.  of  powder,  600  Ib.  of  lead,  1000  flints, 
for  the  use  of  the  militia  of  this  county,  and  deposit 
the  same  in  such  place  as  the  Committee  may  here 
after  direct. 

"Signed  by  order  of  the  Committee ', 

"  EPH.  BREVARD, 
"  Clerk  of  the  Committee." 

Simeson  erred  only  in  adding  the  name  of  John 
Phifer  to  the  number  of  those  mentioned  in  the 
military  order.  But  his  error  was  a  likely  one,  for 
it  appears  that  John  Phifer  actually  received  the 
military  stores  purchased  under  the  order.  On 
December  22,  1775,  the  Provincial  Council  of  North 


Testimony  of  the  Witnesses          2 1 1 

Carolina  resolved  that  Jeremiah  McCaffety  be  paid 
for  "  two  hundred  and  ninety-seven  pounds  and 
three-quarters  of  a  pound  of  Gun  powder  taken 
and  received  by  Colonel  Thomas  Polk  and  Major 
John  Phifer."  ' 

The  testimony  of  the  Rev.  Humphrey  Hunter 
is  contained  in  an  extract  from  his  memoir,  as  it 
is  entitled  in  the  State  Pamphlet,  which  consists 
of  little  more  than  an  abridgment  of  the  published 
Alexander  narrative,  a  transcript  of  the  accompany 
ing  resolutions,  and  a  list  of  "  delegates  "  prepared 
from  the  address  of  Dr.  Moses  Winslow  Alexander, 
delivered  in  Hopewell  church,  Mecklenberg  county, 
July  5,  I824.1  "The  memoir  is  dated  1827,"  said 
Romulus  M.  Saunders  in  1852,  after  examining  the 
original  then  in  the  possession  of  Governor  Swain, 
"  and  appears  to  be  a  response  to  a  request  made 
by  Dr.  Alexander,  .  .  ."2  Hunter  was  barely 
twenty  years  of  age  when  the  memorable  event 
occurred.  Even  he,  blindly  following  the  Alex 
ander  narrative,  showed  that  the  paper  of  May  31, 
1775,  was  in  his  thoughts.  He  wrote:  "Those 
resolves  [the  Alexander  series]  having  been  con 
curred  in,  bye-laws  and  regulations  for  the  govern 
ment  of  a  standing  Committee  of  Public  Safety 
were  enacted  and  acknowledged."  This  is  an 
accurate  reminiscence  of  the  substance  of  all  the 
resolves  of  the  paper  of  May  31,  1775,  which 

1  Catawb a  Journal  (Charlotte),  Oct.  19,  1824.  Republished  in  the  South 
ern  Home  (Charlotte),  May  10,  1875,  and  Charlotte  Observer,  May  20,  1906. 

2  Address  at  Wake  Forest  College,  N.  C.     Cf.  Prof.  Phillips  in  N.  C. 
Univ.  Mag.,  May  1853. 


212        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

follow  the  resolves  analogous  to  a  declaration  of 
independence.  Hunter  took  it  for  granted  that  it 
was  on  May  20,  1775  ;  that  the  declaration,  the  by 
laws,  and  the  regulations  were  read  to  the  assem 
bled  multitude  by  Colonel  Thomas  Polk;  but  he 
would  undoubtedly  have  scorned  the  suggestion 
that  substantially  the  same  measures  were  adopted 
at  two  meetings  held  eleven  days  apart. 

Colonel  William  Polk,  a  son  of  Colonel  Thomas 
Polk,  was  the  first  to  prepare  his  statement  after 
the  publication  of  the  supposititious  document  in 
1819,  the  most  active  in  collecting  testimony  to 
support  its  authenticity,  and  the  most  circumstan 
tial  in  his  account  of  the  events  of  1775.  Colonel 
Polk  was  a  youth  of  sixteen  in  May,  1775.  He 
used  the  Alexander  narrative  freely  in  preparing 
his  own,  and  copied  the  Alexander  resolutions 
from  a  manuscript  copy  given  him  by  Dr.  Joseph 
McKnitt  Alexander  which  he  could  not  vouch  to 
be  "in  the  words  of  the  Committee  who  framed 
them."  After  scraping  his  memory  to  make  room 
for  these  resolutions,  Colonel  Polk  recollected: 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing  resolutions,  a  number  of 
other  resolutions  &  bye  laws  were  adopted.  Courts  of  Jus 
tice  were  held  by  &  under  the  direction  of  the  Delegates. 
....  A  Committee  of  Safety  was  selected  from  the  whole 
Delegation,  to  whom  was  given  power  to  examine  all  persons 
brought  before  them  who  were  charged  or  suspected  of  being 
inimical  to  the  cause  of  freedom  &  the  safety  of  the  Country. 

This  was  the  formal  work  of  the  meeting  held  on 
May  31,  1 775.  But  we  are  not  left  merely  to  infer 
ential  reasoning  in  order  to  affirm  that  the  material 


Testimony  of  the  Witnesses          213 

facts  stated  in  Colonel  Folk's  narrative  were  recol 
lected  by  John  McKnitt  Alexander  and  not  by 
himself.  John  Simeson  wrote  to  Colonel  Polk, 
January  20,  1820,  in  reply  to  a  request  for  infor 
mation  :  "  Yourself,  sir,  in  your  eighteenth  year 
and  on  the  spot,  your  worthy  father,  the  most  pop 
ular  and  influential  character  in  the  county,  and 
yet  you  cannot  state  much  from  recollection  ! " 

George  Graham,  William  Hutchison,  Jonas  Clark, 
and  Robert  Robison  united  in  a  single  depo 
sition,  which  was  given  at  the  request  of  Colonel 
William  Polk  and  published  February  18,  1820. 
Two  of  them  were  seventeen  and  two  about  twenty- 
four  years  of  age  on  the  remote  occasion  of  which 
they  wrote,  yet  their  joint  certificate  involves 
many  minute  details,  and  was  evidently  written  by 
some  one  who  tried  to  group  together  all  that  was 
known  on  the  subject.  The  use  of  the  terms  "  del 
egate"  and  "  delegation  "  for  "  Committee  "  and 
"  Committee-man  "  shows  how  closely  the  Alexan 
der  narrative  was  adhered  to.  Although  they 
assent  to  the  date  of  May  20,  1775,  these  four  wit 
nesses  aver  that  at  the  time  when  the  declaration 
was  adopted  "a  Committee  of  Safety  for  the 
county  were  elected,  who  were  clothed  with  civil 
and  military  power,  and  under  their  authority  sev 
eral  disaffected  persons"  were  arrested,  tried,  and 
deported.  The  ordinances  to  this  effect  were 
adopted  at  the  meeting  of  May  31,  1775. 

The  foregoing  eight  witnesses  are  the  only  ones 
among  the  fourteen  summoned  who  confessed  to 
any  recollection  concerning  the  terms  of  the  reso- 


214        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

lutions  which  they  understood  to  be  a  declaration 
of  independence.  The  certificates  of  these  eight, 
with  the  exception  of  John  Simeson's,  bear  internal 
evidence  of  having  been  prepared  with  the  aid  of 
the  narrative  and  resolutions  published  in  1819. 
All  eight,  with  the  very  significant  exception  of 
John  Simeson,  stated  that  the  declaration  was 
made  May  20,  1775.  Simeson  had  evidently  seen 
the  resolutions  in  the  Raleigh  Register  of  April  30, 
1819,  but  forgot  their  date  so  soon  afterwards  that 
in  January  following  he  could  only  say  that  the 
resolutions  which  he  had  in  mind  were  passed 
"  towards  the  close  of  May,  1775." 

Of  the  remaining  six  witnesses,  Isaac  Alexander, 
writing  in  1830 — after  May  20,  1775,  had  become 
commonly  known  as  the  date  of  the  declaration 
and  its  anniversary  celebrated — alone  repeated  that 
date.  Among  the  five  who  could  not  give  the 
exact  date  were  the  men  most  likely  to  have  remem 
bered  it  if  any  could  have  done  so  without  refresh 
ing  their  memories  by  a  sight  of  the  published 
document — Captain  James  Jack,  the  bearer  of  the 
resolutions  which  all  had  in  mind  to  the  Continental 
Congress,  and  John  Davidson,  the  sole  surviving 
member  of  the  body  that  adopted  them  who  testi 
fied.1  Captain  Jack,  writing  from  his  home  in 
Georgia  in  December,  1819,  said  that  he  had  "seen 
in  the  newspapers  some  pieces  respecting  the 

1  Another  member,  David  Reese,  is  referred  to  in  the  Western 
Carolinian  (Salisbury,  N.  C.)  of  May  17,  1825,  as  then  living  in  Cabarrus 
County.  Lyman  C.  Draper,  however,  believed  that  the  reputed  "  signer  " 
of  that  name  died  in  1787. 


Testimony  of  the  Witnesses          215 

Declaration  of  Independence  by  the  people  of 
Mecklenburg  county,  in  the  State  of  North  Caro 
lina,  in  May,  1775."  He  could  not,  however,  trust 
his  memory  to  supply  even  the  month  in  which  the 
declaration  was  made,  for  he  stated  that  he  set  out 
for  Philadelphia  "  the  following  month,  say  June." 
Neither  could  John  Davidson,  a  reputed  "  signer  " 
of  the  declaration,  although  he  wrote  as  late  as 
1830,  and  must  have  heard  it  stated  many  times  dur 
ing  the  previous  decade.  But  "  being  far  advanced 
in  years,"  wrote  Davidson,  "and  not  having  my 
mind  frequently  directed  to  that  circumstance  for 
some  years,  I  can  give  you  but  a  very  succinct 
history  of  the  transaction.  ...  I  am  confident 
that  the  Declaration  of  Independence  by  the  people 
of  Mecklenburg  was  made  public  at  least  twelve 
months  before  that  of  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States." 

Rev.  Francis  Cummins,  of  Georgia,  seems  to 
have  been  the  only  witness  who  testified  before  he 
had  seen  the  publication  of  1819.  He  was  a 
student  in  Charlotte  in  May,  1775.  Captain  Jack 
said  in  1819  that  Cummins  was  "  as  well,  or  per 
haps  better  acquainted  with  the  proceedings  of  that 
time  than  any  man  now  living."  But  in  November, 
1819,  Cummins  could  not  state  with  certainty  even 
the  year  in  which  the  declaration  was  promulgated. 
His  imperfect  memory  told  him  that  before  it  was 
adopted  he  and  many  others  in  Mecklenburg  "  ab 
jured  allegiance  to  George  III.  or  any  other  for 
eign  power"  before  magistrates,  and  a  subsequent 
declaration  of  independence  was  therefore  entirely 


216        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

in  keeping  with  his  confused  recollections  of  the 
trend  of  sentiment  toward  independence  at  that 
period.  "  At  length,"  he  wrote,  "  in  the  same  year, 
1775,  I  think,  at  least  positively  before  July  4,  1776, 
the  males  generally  of  that  county  met  on  a  certain 
day  in  Charlotte,  and  from  the  head  of  the  Court 
house  stairs  proclaimed  independence  of  English 
Government,  by  their  herald,  Col.  Thomas  Polk." 1 
Samuel  Wilson,  in  an  undated  certificate,  said  that 
the  "  committee  or  delegation  "  declared  indepen 
dence  "  in  May,  1775."  James  Johnson,  in  1827, 
also  gave  the  date  as  "  May,  1775."  From  the  tes 
timony  of  these  six  Mecklenburg  fathers  who  could 
not  remember  the  date,  it  certainly  seems  most 
probable  that  not  one  of  the  eight  who  testified  to 
the  date  of  May  20,  1775,  ever  associated  that  date 
with  the  resolutions  which  they  understood  to  be 
a  declaration  of  independence  before  the  Alexander 
paper  was  published  in  1819.  If  there  was  such  a 
one,  it  cannot  be  shown  that  he  did  not  learn  that 
date  in  1800  or  later,  directly  or  indirectly  from 
John  McKnitt  Alexander. 

With  respect  to  the  disputed  secretaryship  of  the 
meeting  which  is  alleged  to  have  declared  indepen 
dence,  the  preponderance  of  the  testimony  of  the 
fourteen  witnesses  is  still  more  emphatically  against 
the  accuracy  of  John  McKnitt  Alexander's  remi- 

1  Cummins  reiterated  his  statement  in  a  pamphlet  containing  a  sermon 
delivered  by  him  July  4,  1819,  published  in  Greensboro,  Ga.,  in  the  same 
year.  The  pamphlet  'is  noticed  in  the  N.  C.  Univ.  Mag.,  October,  1859,  JXM 
181.  As  the  reference  to  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  is  in  the  form  of  a 
note  to  pages  17  and  18  and  mentions  the  month  in  which  the  declaration 
was  made,  which  Cummins  could  not  recollect  in  November,  1819,  the  note 
was  no  doubt  written,  and  the  pamphlet  published,  at  a  later  date. 


Testimony  of  the  Witnesses          217 

niscences.  When  we  consider  the  circumstances 
under  which  they  testified,  it  is  surprising  that  half 
their  number  should  have  controverted  Alexan 
der's  statement  that  he  acted  as  secretary  to  the 
meeting,  and  named  in  that  relation  Ephraim  Bre- 
vard,  the  recorded  secretary  of  the  meeting  of  May 
31,  1775.  As  soon  as  Colonel  William  Polk  saw 
the  Alexander  paper  in  1819,  he  assured  the  editor 
of  the  Raleigh  Register^  "of  the  correctness  of  the 
facts  generally,  tho'  he  thought  there  were  errors  as 
to  the  name  of  the  Secretary,  &c.,  and  said  that  he 
should  probably  be  able  to  correct  these,  and  throw 
further  light  on  the  subject  by  inquiries  amongst 
some  of  his  old  friends  in  Mecklenburg  County."  In 
the  paper  which  he  wrote  in  August,  1819,  the  month 
in  which  the  editor  of  the  Raleigh  Register  first  an 
nounced  this  fact,  Colonel  Polk  maintains  that  his 
father,  not  Adam  Alexander,  was  the  colonel  com 
mandant  of  Mecklenburg  who  issued  the  order  for 
the  meeting,  and  that  Ephraim  Brevard,  not  John 
McKnitt  Alexander,  acted  as  secretary;  and  he 
shows  that  he  doubted  whether  Abraham  Alexan 
der  was  chairman.  Six  witnesses,  including  Isaac 
Alexander,  a  cousin  of  John  McKnitt  Alexander, 
confirmed  Colonel  Polk's  recollections  concerning 
the  secretaryship  of  the  meeting.  Seven  also  recol 
lected  as  he  did  that  Ephraim  Brevard  was  author 
of  the  declaration  of  independence.  General  Jo 
seph  Graham  alone  certified  to  the  presence  of 
John  McKnitt  Alexander  as  sole  secretary  of  the 
meeting.  As  in  the  case  of  a  witness  who  said  that 

1  Raleigh  Register,  Feb.  18,  1820. 


2i8         The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

the  body  which  adopted  the  declaration  was  a  "  com 
mittee  or  delegation,"  Humphrey  Hunter  sought  to 
reconcile  his  own  recollections  with  those  of  John 
McKnitt  Alexander  by  designating  both  Brevard 
and  Alexander  as  secretaries.  In  the  records  of  the 
committees  of  the  Revolutionary  period  organized 
under  the  articles  of  American  Association  we  find 
no  instance  of  a  dual  secretaryship.  Alexander  was 
probably  secretary  of  the  Mecklenburg  committee 
shortly  before  or  after  the  meeting  referred  to  in  his 
narrative. 

As  six  witnesses  stated  positively,  with  Colonel 
William  Polk,  that  Thomas  Polk,  not  Adam  Alex 
ander,  issued  the  order  for  the  meeting  which  is  said 
to  have  declared  independence,  the  editors  of  the 
State  Pamphlet  substituted  Polk's  name  for  Alexan 
der's  in  their  purported  reprint  of  the  paper  pub 
lished  in  the  Raleigh  Register  of  April  30,  1819.  At 
the  head  of  the  reprinted  paper  stands  the  reference 
to  the  Raleigh  Register  in  the  usual  form,  but  no 
mention  or  explanation  of  this  unwarrantable  liberty 
is  made.  The  same  alteration  was  made  in  the 
original  manuscript  in  an  unknown  handwriting. 

The  story  of  the  signing  of  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  of  Independence  was  probably  copied, 
like  the  declaration  itself,  from  what  was  done  at 
Philadelphia  in  1776.  John  McKnitt  Alexander 
failed  to  record  it  in  his  account  of  the  proceedings 
of  the  famous  meeting.  The  story  seems  to  have 
originated  in  1819.  Colonel  William  Polk  and  the 
joint  certificate  of  four  survivors  of  May,  1775, 
which  was  prepared  at  his  instance,  stated  that  the 


Testimony  of  the  Witnesses  219 

declaration  was  subscribed  by  all  the  members  of 
the  body  that  passed  it ;  but  no  other  witnesses 
confirm  them,  not  even  John  Davidson,  one  of  the 
reputed  "  signers."  Colonel  Folk's  manuscript  gives 
the  names  of  fifteen  "  delegates "  to  the  meeting, 
the  joint  certificate  seven  others,  and  John  Sime- 
son's  letter  two  others.  A  list  of  these  twenty- 
four,  with  the  addition  of  the  name  of  Henry 
Downs,  is  contained  in  the  address  of  Dr.  Moses 
Winslow  Alexander,  delivered  July  5,  1824.  As 
fifteen  of  the  names  in  the  list  are  nearly  in  the 
same  order  in  which  they  were  recollected  by  Col 
onel  Polk,  and  as  two  of  these  fifteen  are  not  men 
tioned  in  any  certificate  of  earlier  date  than  Dr. 
Alexander's  address  except  Colonel  Folk's,  it  is 
likely  that  the  list  was  first  published  by  Judge 
Archibald  DeBow  Murphey  with  the  revised  Polk 
narrative  in  the  lost  Hillsboro  Recorder  of  March, 
1821.  Rev.  Humphrey  Hunter's  autobiography, 
written  in  1827,  enumerates  these  twenty-five  names 
and  adds  that  of  Richard  Harris,  Sen.  Hunter 
changed  their  order  to  make  them,  "according  to 
my  best  recollection  and  belief,"  he  said,  "as  they 
were  placed  on  the  roll"!  The  "official"  list  of 
"  Delegates  Present,"  published  in  the  State  Pamph 
let,  is  a  copy  of  Dr.  Moses  W.  Alexander's  with  the 
addition  of  the  name  of  Richard  Harris,  Sen.,  which 
should  have  been  Robert  Harris. 

In  a  letter  to  Colonel  Paul  B.  Means,  dated  May 
15,  1879,  Professor  Charles  Phillips  said1 : 

1  May,  7775 ',  26.     This  pamphlet,  published  in   Greensboro,  N.  C., 
in  1887,  was  suppressed  for  typographical  blunders. 


220        The  Mecklenburg  Declaration 

Governor  Swain  had  another  manuscript  which  he  would 
not  let  me  publish.  It  purported  to  be  a  list  of  the  delegates 
to  the  meeting  of  May  2oth,  1775,  but  not  of  contemporary 
authority.  It  had  been  doctored  in  several  places — names 
having  been  struck  out  and  others  of  the  Alexander  family 
and  connexion  inserted.  The  origin  and  history  of  that 
paper  was  unknown,  .... 

Professor  Phillips  stated  that  this  paper  "  had 
evidently  been  used,"  and  that  it  was  probably  got 
ten  up  for  Dr.  Moses  W.  Alexander's  address. 

A  handbill  containing  the  first  three  resolutions 
of  May  20,  1775,  and  thirty-one  names  appended, 
is  reproduced  in  facsimile  in  Johnson's  Traditions 
of  the  Revolution  (1851),  in  the  New  York  Herald 
of  May  20,  1875,  and  in  Wheeler's  Reminiscences 
of  North  Carolina,  as  "  the  oldest  publication  of 
the  Mecklenburg  declaration  yet  discovered  in 
print,"  and  as  probably  dating  about  the  year  1800. 
In  his  Charlotte  address  of  1875  Governor  Gra 
ham  laid  much  stress  upon  this  paper  and  upon  a 
copy  printed  on  satin  which  was  once  owned  by 
Andrew  Jackson.  Very  shortly  afterwards,  it  was 
learned  from  Colonel  F.  S.  Heiskell,  who  printed 
them,  and  Dr.  J.  G.  M.  Ramsey,  who  prepared 
them,  that  they  were  printed  in  Knoxville,  Tenn., 
in  1825  or  thereabouts.1  Ramsey  wrote  Judge 
A.  D.  Murphey,  April  9,  1827,  that  he  had  the 
broadside  printed  and  wished  to  send  him  a  copy.2 
His  list  of  "signers"  is  made  up  of  Dr.  Moses  W. 
Alexander's  and  of  the  names  of  six  men  mentioned 

1  Daily  Press  and  Herald  (Knoxville),  May  23,    1875.     Cf.  Mag.  of 
Amer.  Hist.,  xxi.,  233  ;  and  May,  1775,  23. 
8  Murphey  papers. 


Testimony  of  the  Witnesses          221 

in  Captain  Jack's  certificate  as  having  been  among 
those  who  "  appeared  to  take  the  lead"  in  the  trans 
actions  of  May,  1775.* 

The  well-known  facsimile  of  the  "  Autographs 
of  the  Members  of  the  Mecklenburg  Committee," 
which  is  sometimes  appended  to  printed  copies  of 
the  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  was  prepared  by 
Benson  J.  Lossing  from  autographs  furnished  by 
Governor  Swain  and  others,  and  first  published  in 
1851-52  in  Lossing's  Pictorial  Field-Book  of  the 
Revolution? 

1  These  six  are  Major  John  Davidson,  Gen,  William  Lee  Davidson, 
Capt.  Ezekiei   Polk  (grandfather  of  President  James    K.  Polk),  Samuel 
Martin,  Duncan  Ochiltree,  and  William  Wilson.     None  of  them  are  men 
tioned  in  the  list  made  up  by  the  editors  of  the  State  Pamphlet,  and  proba 
bly  none  but  the  first  named  belong  there.     Capt.  Jack  did  not  say  that  they 
attended  the  meeting  of  which  he  wrote.     Gen.  Davidson  could  hardly  have 
been  present,  as  he  was  at  that  time  a  resident  of  Rowan  county  and  a 
member  of  the   Rowan   Committee  of  Safety.     With  respect  to  Ezekiei 
Polk,  Mr.  A.  S.  Salley,  Jr.,  has  furnished  this  information:     "In  1774 
Ezekiei  Polk  was  lieutenant-colonel  of  the  militia  regiment  of  the  New  Ac 
quisition  of  South  Carolina  and  in  December,  1774,  he  was  elected  a  dep 
uty  from  the  New  Acquisition  to  the  Provincial  Congress  of  South  Carolina 
and  was  still  a  member  of  that  body  in  May,  1775.     On  the  I2th  of  June 
he  was  elected  by  this  Congress  a  captain  in  the  3d  Regiment  of  South  Car 
olina  ;  was  commissioned  on  the  i8th,  and  by  the  i8th  of  July  had  raised 
his  company  and  was  in  service,  and  he  did  not  become  a  citizen  of  Meck 
lenburg  County  until  1778."      We  know  nothing  concerning  Samuel  Martin, 
Duncan  Ochiltree,  and  William  Wilson.     The  "official"  list  of  twenty- 
six  delegates  in  the  State  Pamphlet  contains  the  names  of  probably  all  the 
participants  at  the  meeting  of   May  31,  1775,  except  John   Davidson's. 
There  is  strong  evidence  that  Robert  Harris,  whose  name  is  there  erro 
neously  given  as  Richard,  has  no  claim  to  that  honor.     The  name  "  Ford  " 
in  the  State  Pamphlet  should  be  written  "  Foard." 

2  The  facsimile  may  also  be  found  in  Cooke's  Revolutionary  History 
of  N.  C.  (1853),  Gov,  Graham's  Address,  Winsor's  Narrative  and  Critical 
History  of  America,  Charlotte  Daily  Observer ',  May  20,  1906,  etc. 


APPENDIX  OF  DOCUMENTS. 


A. 


COLONEL  POLK  S  COPY  OF  THE    DOCUMENT    PREPARED 
BY    "  J.    MC  KNITT  "  FROM    HIS    FATHER'S    PAPERS 
AND     PUBLISHED    WITH     EMENDATIONS     IN     THE 
"  RALEIGH  REGISTER,"  APRIL  30,    1819.' 
Copy  of  Jo.  M?  K.  Alexanders  letter  to 
W™  Davidson  on  Declaration  of  Independence  Meek? 

N.  Carolina    ) 

Mecklenburg  )      May  20.  1775 

In  the  Spring  of  1775,  the  leading  characters  of  Mecklenb* 
C°;  stimulated  by  that  enthusiastic  patriotism,  which 
elevates  the  mind  above  considerations  of  individual 
aggrandizement,  &  scorning  to  shelter  themselves  from 
the  impending  storm  by  submission  to  lawless  power,  &c 
&c — held  several  meetings  detachedly — in  each  of  which 
the  individual  sentiments  were  "that  the  cause  of  Boston 
was  the  cause  of  all ;  that  their  destinies  were  indissolubly 
connected  with  those  of  their  Eastern  fellow  Citizens  & 
that  they  must  either  submit  to  all  the  impositions  which 
an  unprincipled  &  to  them  an  unrepresented  Parliment 
might  impose ;  or  support  their  Brethern  who  were  doomed 
to  sustain  the  first  shock  of  that  power  which  if  successful 
there,  would  ultimately  overwhelm  all  in  the  common 
calamity — Conformably  to  these  principles  Col.  Adam 

1  From  the  original  manuscript  in  the  New  York  Public  Library  (Emmet : 
1494).  It  was  probably  enclosed  in  Folk's  letter  of  Aug.  18,  1819,  to  Judge 
A.  D.  Murphey,  with  his  own  narrative.  It  came  from  the  Murphey 
papers. 

225 


226  Appendix  of  Documents 

Alexander  through  solicitation  issued  an  order  to  each 
Capts  company  in  the  County  of  Mecklenburg,  then  com 
prising  the  present  County  of  Cabarrus  directing  each 
militia  Capts  company  to  elect  two  persons  and  delegate 
to  them  ample  power  to  devise  ways  &  means  to  aid, 
assist  their  suffering  brethern  in  Boston  and  also  generally 
to  adopt  measures  to  extricate  themselves  from  the  im 
pending  storm  &  to  secure  unimpaired  their  invaluable 
rights  priviledges  &  liberties  from  the  dominant  grasp  of 
British  imposition  &  tyranny.  In  conformity  to  said 
order  on  the  19.  of  May  1775  the  said  delegation  met  in 
Charlotte  town  vested  with  unlimited  powers,  at  which 
time  official  news  by  express  arived  of  the  Battle  of  Lex 
ington  on  that  of  the  preceeding  month — every  Delegate 
felt  the  value  and  importance  of  the  prize  and  the  awful 
&  solemn  crisis  which  had  arived — every  bosom  swelled 
with  indignation  at  the  malice,  inveteracy  and  unsatiable 
revenge  developed  in  the  late  attack  at  Lexington.  The 
universal  sentiment  was,  let  us  not  flatter  ourselves  that 
popular  harangues  or  resolves,  that  popular  vapour  will 
avert  the  storm,  or  vanquish  our  common  enemy;  let  us 
deliberate  let  us  calculate  the  issue  the  probable  result, 
and  what  is  still  more  endearing  the  liberties  of  America — 
Abraham  Alexander  was  then  elected  Ch?  &  Jn°  MCK. 
Alexander  Cl* — after  a  free  and  full  description  of  the 
various  objects  for  which  the  delegation  had  been  con 
vened  it  was  unanimously  ordained. 

i5.1  Resolved — That  whosoever  directly  or  indirectly  abet 
ted,  or  in  any  way  form  or  manner  countenanced  the  un- 
chartered  and  dangerous  invasion  of  our  rights  as  claimed 
by  G  Britain  is  an  enemy  to  this  country,  to  America,  &  to 
the  inherent  &  inalienable  rights  of  Man. 
2.  Resolved,  That  ["That"  is  in  brackets]  We  the  Cit 
izens  of  Mecklenburg  County  do  hereby  dissolve  the  po 
litical  bands  which  have  connected  us  to  the  mother 
country  &  hereby  absolve  ourselves  from  all  allegiance  to 
the  British  Crown  and  abjure  all  political  connection, 


"J.  McKnitt"  Document  227 

contract  or  association  with  that  Nation,  who  have  wantonly 
trampled  on  our  rights  and  liberties  &  inhumanly  shed  the 
innocent  blood  of  our  American  Patriots  at  Lexington. 
3d  Resolved  We  do  hereby  declare  ourselves  a  free  & 
independent  People  are  &  ought  of  right  ought  to  be  a 
soverign  &  self  governing  association  under  the  controul 
of  no  power  other  than  that  of  our  God  &  the  general 
Goverment  of  the  Congress,  to  the  maintainance  of  which 
independence  we  solemnly  pledge  to  each  other  our  mutual 
cooperation  our  lives  our  fortunes  &  our  most  sacred 
honor. 

4  That  ["That"  is  written  over  the  "As"]  As  we  now  ac 
knowledge  the  existence  and  controul  of  no  law  or  legal 
Officer  civil  or  military  within  this  Country — We  do  hereby 
ordain  and  adopt  as  a  rule  of  Life  all  and  each  of  our  former 
laws  wherein  nevertheless  the  Crown  of  G.  B.  never  can  be 
considered  as  holding  rights  priviledges,  immunities  or 
authority  therin. 

5.  Resolved.  That  ["That"  is  written  a  little  above 
the  line]  It  is  also  further  decreed  that  all,  each  &  every 
military  Officer  in  this  County  is  hereby  reinstated  to  his 
former  command  and  authority  he  acting  conformably  to 
these  regulations,  And  that  every  Member  present  of  this 
delegation  shall  henceforth  be  a  civil  Officer  Viz  a  Justice 
of  the  Peace  in  the  character  of  a  Committee  man,  to  is 
sue  process,  hear  &  determine  all  matters  of  controversy 
according  to  s?  adopted  Laws  &  to  preserve  Peace  union  & 
harmony  in  s"?  County — and  to  use  every  exertion  to  spread 
the  love  of  Country  &  fire  of  freedom  throught  America; 
untill  a  more  general  &  organised  goverment  be  established 
in  this  Province. 

A  number  of  bye  laws  were  also  added  merely  to  protect 
the  association  from  confusion  and  to  regulate  their  general 
conduct  as  Citizens — 

After  sitting  in  the  Q  House  all  night,  neither  sleepy, 
hungry  or  fatigued,  and  after  discussing  every  paragraph, 
they  were  all  passed  sanctioned  &  decreed  Unanimously 


228  Appendix  of  Documents 

about  2.  O  Clock  A  M.  May  20. — In  a  few  days  a  deputation 
of  s?  delegation  convened  when  Cap  James  Jack  of  Charlotte 
was  deputed  as  express  to  the  Congress  in  ["at"  is  written 
over  "in"]  Philadelphia  with  a  copy  of  s?  Resolves  &  Pro 
ceedings  together  with  a  letter  address"?  to  our  three  Repre 
sentatives  there  Viz — R?  Caswell  W?1  Hooper  &  Jos. 
Hughes — under  express  injunction  personally  &  through 
the  State  representation  to  use  all  possible  means  to  have 
said  proceedings  sanctioned  &  approved  by  the  general 
Congress. 

On  the  return  of  Cap*  Jack  the  delegation  learn'd  their 
proceedings  were  individually  approved  by  the  Members 
of  Congress — but  it  was  deemed  premature  to  lay  them 
before  the  House — a  joint  letter  from  s?  3  Members  of  Con 
gress  was  also  rec?  complimentary  of  the  zeal  in  the 
common  cause  &  recommending  perseverance  order  & 
energy. 

The  subsequent  harmony  exertion  and  unanimity  in 
the  cause  of  liberty  &  independency  evidently  resulting 
from  these  regulations  &  the  continued  exertion  of  s? 
delegation  apparantly  tranquilised  this  section  of  the 
State  &  met  with  the  concurrence  &  high  approbation  of 
the  Council  of  safety  who  held  their  sessions  at  Newbern 
&  W.mton  alternately  &  who  confirmed  the  nomination  & 
acts  of  the  Delegation  in  their  official  capacity. 

From  this  Delegation  originated  the  C*  of  enquiry  of 
this  County  who  constituted  and  held  their  first  session  in 
Charlotte;  they  then  held  their  meetings  regularly  at 
Charlotte,  Col?  James  Harris's  &  at  Col.  Phifers  alternately 
one  week  at  each  place.  It  was  civil  court  founded  on 
military  process — before  this  judication  all  suspicious 
persons  were  made  to  appear — (who  were  formerly  tryed 
&  banished  or  continued  under  guard 

Its  jurisdiction  was  as  unlimited  as  toryism  and  its 
decrees  as  final  as  the  confidence  &  patriotism  of  the 
country — several  were  arrested  &  brought  before  them 
from  Lincoln  Rowan  &  the  adjacent  Counties — Booth  & 


"J.  McKnitt  "  Document  229 

Dunn  lawyers  were  brought  from  Salisbury  tryed  convicted 
&  banished  &c 

J  Mc  K  Alexander  Sen' 

The  foregoing  is  a  true  copy  of  the  papers  on  the  above 
subject  left  in  my  hands  by  J.  Mf  A-dec. — I  find  it  men 
tioned  on  file  that  the  original  book  was  burned  Apf  1 800 — 
That  a  copy  of  the  proceedings  was  sent  to  H.  W™son  in 
N.  Y.  then  writing  a  History  of  N.  C.  &  that  a  copy  was 
sent  to  Gen1  Davie. 

J  McKnitt 

[The  manuscript  is  endorsed  by  Colonel  Polk: 
"Copy  of  letter  to  Wm 
Davidson  at  Congress 
with  the  decleration 
of  Independence  by  the 
C°  of  Mecklenburg 

May  20.  1775"] 


CITIZENS  OF  MECKLENBURG  COUNTY, 


TWENTIETH  DAY  OF  MAY,  1775. 


ACCOMPANYING    DOCUMENTS, 


AND  THE 

PROCEEDINGS  OF  THE  CUMBERLAND  ASSOCIATION 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  GOVERNOR, 


Under  the  authority  and  direction  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of    j 


NORTH   CAROLINA. 


RALEIGH  : 

LAWRENCE  &  LEMAY,  Printers  to  the  State, 
1831. 


PREFACE. 

The  resolution  of  the  General  Assembly  directing  this 
publication,  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  Governor  to  cause 
to  be  published  in  pamphlet  form  the  Report  of  the  com 
mittee  relative  to  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and 
the  accompanying  documents,  in  the  following  order,  viz. 
i.  The  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  with  the  names  of  the 
Delegates  composing  the  meeting;  2.  The  certificates  tes 
tifying  to  the  circumstances  attending  the  Declaration; 
and  3.  The  proceedings  of  the  Cumberland  Association. 

In  the  discharge  of  this  duty,  the  Governor  has  deemed 
it  proper  to  prefix  to  the  publication  the  following  brief 
review  of  the  evidence  by  which  the  authenticity  of  this 
interesting  portion  of  the  history  of  North  Carolina  is 
controverted  and  sustained. 

On  the  3oth  of  April,  1819,  the  publication  marked  A, 
made  its  appearance  in  the  Raleigh  Register.  It  was 
communicated  to  the  Editors  of  that  paper  by  Doct. 
Joseph  M'Nitt,  then  and  now  a  citizen  of  the  county  of 
Mecklenburg,  and  was  speedily  republished  in  most  of 
the  newspapers  in  the  Union.  A  paper  containing  it  (the 
Essex  Register)  was,  it  seems,  on  the  22d  June,  1819, 
enclosed  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  by  his  illustrious  compatriot 
John  Adams,  accompanied  with  the  remark,  that  he  thought 
it  genuine;  and  this  suggestion  of  Mr.  Adams  elicited  the 
following  reply,  which  was  at  that  time  published  in 
various  newspapers,  and  has  been  since  given  to  the  world 
in  the  4th  volume  of  Mr.  Jefferson's  Works,  page  314: 

231 


232  Appendix  of  Documents 

TO  JOHN  ADAMS. 

"  Monticello,  July  9,  1819. 

"DEAR  SIR, — I  am  in  debt  to  you  for  your  letters  of  May 
the  2ist,  27th,  and  June  the  22nd.  The  first,  delivered 
me  by  Mr.  Greenwood,  gave  me  the  gratification  of  his 
acquaintance;  and  a  gratification  it  always  is,  to  be  made 
acquainted  with  gentlemen  of  candor,  worth,  and  infor 
mation,  as  I  found  Mr.  Greenwood  to  be.  That  on  the 
subject  of  Mr.  Samuel  Adams  Wells,  shall  not  be  for 
gotten  in  time  and  place,  when  it  can  be  used  to  his 
advantage. 

"  But  what  has  attracted  my  peculiar  notice,  is  the  paper 
from  Mecklenburg  county,  of  North  Carolina,  published 
in  the  Essex  Register,  which  you  were  so  kind  as  to  enclose 
in  your  last,  of  June  the  22nd.  And  you  seem  to  think  it 
genuine.  I  believe  it  spurious.  I  deem  it  to  be  a  very 
unjustifiable  quiz,  like  that  of  the  volcano,  so  minutely 
related  to  us  as  having  broken  out  in  North  Carolina, 
some  half  dozen  years  ago,  in  that  part  of  the  country, 
and  perhaps  in  that  very  county  of  Mecklenburg,  for  I  do 
not  remember  its  precise  locality.  If  this  paper  be  really 
taken  from  the  Raleigh  Register,  as  quoted,  I  wonder  it 
should  have  escaped  Richie,  who  culls  what  is  good  from 
every  paper,  as  the  bee  from  every  flower ;  and  the  National 
Intelligencer,  too,  which  is  edited  by  a  North  Carolinian: 
and  that  the  fire  should  blaze  out  all  at  once  in  Essex,  one 
thousand  miles  from  where  the  spark  is  said  to  have  fallen. 
But  if  really  taken  from  the  Raleigh  Register,  who  is  the 
narrator,  and  is  the  name  subscribed  real,  or  is  it  as  fic 
titious  as  the  paper  itself?  It  appeals,  too,  to  an  original 
book,  which  is  burnt,  to  Mr.  Alexander,  who  is  dead,  to  a 
joint  letter  from  Caswell,  Hughes,  and  Hooper,  all  dead, 
to  a  copy  sent  to  the  dead  Caswell,  and  another  sent  to 
Doctor  Williamson,  now  probably  dead,  whose  memory 
did  not  recollect,  in  the  history  he  has  written  of  North 
Carolina,  this  gigantic  step  of  its  county  of  Mecklenburg. 


State  Pamphlet  233 

Horry,  too,  is  silent  in  his  history  of  Marion,  whose  scene 
of  action  was  the  country  bordering  on  Mecklenburg. 
Ramsay,  Marshall,  Jones,  Girardin,  Wirt,  historians  of 
the  adjacent  States,  all  silent.  When  Mr.  Henry's  resolu 
tions,  far  short  of  independence,  flew  like  lightning  through 
every  paper,  and  kindled  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic,  this 
flaming  declaration  of  the  same  date,  of  the  independence 
of  Mecklenburg  county,  of  North  Carolina,  absolving  it 
from  the  British  allegiance,  and  abjuring  all  political  con 
nection  with  that  nation,  although  sent  to  Congress,  too, 
is  never  heard  of.  It  is  not  known  even  a  twelvemonth 
after,  when  a  similar  proposition  is  first  made  in  that  body. 
Armed  with  this  bold  example,  would  not  you  have  ad 
dressed  our  timid  brethren  in  peals  of  thunder,  on  their 
tardy  fears?  Would  not  every  advocate  of  independence 
have  rung  the  glories  of  Mecklenburg  county,  in  North 
Carolina,  in  the  ears  of  the  doubting  Dickinson  and  others, 
who  hung  so  heavily  on  us?  Yet  the  example  of  independ 
ent  Mecklenburg  county,  in  North  Carolina,  was  never  once 
quoted.  The  paper  speaks,  too,  of  the  continued  exertions 
of  their  delegation  (Caswell,  Hooper,  Hughes,)  'in  the 
cause  of  liberty  and  independence.'  Now,  you  remember 
as  well  as  I  do,  that  we  had  not  a  greater  tory  in  Congress 
than  Hooper;  that  Hughes  was  very  wavering,  sometimes 
firm,  sometimes  feeble,  according  as  the  day  was  clear  or 
cloudy;  that  Caswell,  indeed,  was  a  good  whig,  and  kept 
these  gentlemen  to  the  notch,  while  he  was  present;  but 
that  he  left  us  soon,  and  their  line  of  conduct  became  then 
uncertain  until  Penn  came,  who  fixed  Hughes,  and  the 
vote  of  the  State.  I  must  not  be  understood  as  suggesting 
any  doubtfulness  in  the  State  of  North  Carolina.  No 
State  was  more  fixed  or  forward.  Nor  do  I  affirm,  posi 
tively,  that  this  paper  is  a  fabrication:  because  the  proof 
of  a  negative  can  only  be  presumptive.  But  I  shall  believe 
it  such  until  positive  and  solemn  proof  of  its  authenticity 
shall  be  produced.  And  if  the  name  of  McKnitt  be  real, 
and  not  a  part  of  the  fabrication,  it  needs  a  vindication 


234  Appendix  of  Documents 

by  the  production  of  such  proof.  For  the  present,  I  must 
be  an  unbeliever  in  the  apocryphal  gospel. 

"  I  am  glad  to  learn  that  Mr.  Ticknor  has  safely  returned 
to  his  friends;  but  should  have  been  much  more  pleased 
had  he  accepted  the  Professorship  in  our  University, 
which  we  should  have  offered  him  in  form.  Mr.  Bowditch, 
too,  refuses  us;  so  fascinating  is  the  vinculum  of  the  dulce 
natale  solum.  Our  wish  is  to  procure  natives,  where  they 
can  be  found,  like  these  gentlemen,  of  the  first  order  of 
acquirement  in  their  respective  lines;  but  preferring 
foreigners  of  the  first  order  to  natives  of  the  second,  we 
shall  certainly  have  to  go,  for  several  of  our  Professors, 
to  countries  more  advanced  in  science  than  we  are. 

"I  set  out  within  three  or  four  days  for  my  other  home, 
the  distance  of  which,  and  its  cross  mails,  are  great  im 
pediments  to  epistolary  communications.  I  shall  remain 
there  about  two  months;  and  there,  here,  and  every 
where,  I  am  and  shall  always  be,  affectionately  and 
respectfully  yours.  "  TH:  JEFFERSON." 

The  republication  of  this  letter  in  a  work  which  is 
intended  for,  and  will  go  down  to  posterity,  recommended 
alike  by  its  intrinsic  excellence,  and  the  illustrious  name  of 
the  author,  has  imposed  upon  the  Legislature  the  task  of 
proving  that,  with  regard  to  this  particular  fact,  Mr. 
Jefferson  was  mistaken,  and  that  his  opinion  was  made  up 
from  a  very  superficial  and  inaccurate  examination  of  the 
publication  in  the  Raleigh  Register,  the  only  evidence 
then  before  him,  and  upon  which  his  letter  is  a  commentary. 

The  letter  itself  was  evidently  written  currente  c alamo, 
and  for  that  reason  may  not  be  regarded  as  a  fair  subject 
for  severe  criticism.  It  is  not  intended  to  subject  it  to 
such  a  test,  nor  is  it  designed  to  examine  it  further  than 
may  be  necessary  to  the  ascertainment  of  truth.  Of  the 
ability,  the  purity,  the  patriotism  of  the  author,  it  is  un 
necessary  to  speak. — His  love  of  country  was  not  bounded 
by  the  confines  of  Virginia;  but  it  is  no  discredit  to  his 


State  Pamphlet  235 

memory  that  her  institutions,  her  heroes  and  her  states 
men  occupied  the  first  place  in  his  affections.  She  was 
emphatically  'the  mother  of  great  men,'  and  'his  own, 
his  native  land;'  and  it  is  no  matter  of  surprize  that  he 
should  be  unwilling,  without  the  most  ample  proof,  to 
transfer  the  brightest  page  of  her  history  to  emblazon  the 
records  of  a  sister  State.  Mr.  Wirt's  Life  of  Patrick  Henry 
had  just  been  published,  and  for  the  latter  was  claimed 
the  high  distinction  of  having  been  the  first  to  give  motion 
to  the  ball  of  the  Revolution.  Mr.  Jefferson  himself  was 
the  author  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  by  Congress, 
and  was  not  disposed  to  share  in  any  degree  the  immor 
tality  with  which  it  had  crowned  him,  with  a  compara 
tively  obscure  citizen  of  North  Carolina;  and,  therefore, 
the  evidence  which  was  at  once  satisfactory  to  Mr. 
Adams,  is  by  him  pronounced  "to  be  a  very  unjustifiable 
quiz." 

The  grounds  for  this  opinion,  in  the  order  in  which  they 
are  given  to  Mr.  Adams,  are,  i.  That  the  story  is  "like 
that  of  the  volcano*  having  broken  out  in  that  part  of 
the  country,  and  perhaps  in  that  very  county  of  Mecklenburg." 
2.  "If  this  paper  be  really  taken  from  the  Raleigh  Register, 
as  quoted,  I  wonder  it  should  have  escaped  Richie,"  &c. 
"and  that  the  fire  should  blaze  out  all  at  once  in  Essex, 
one  thousand  miles  from  where  the  spark  is  said  to  have 
fallen."  3.  "  But  if  really  taken  from  the  Raleigh  Register, 
who  is  the  narrator,  and  is  the  name  subscribed  real,  or  is  it 
as  -fictitious  as  the  paper  itself?"  4.  "It  appeals,  too,  to  an 
original  book,  which  is  burnt,  to  Mr.  Alexander,  who  is 
dead,  to  a  joint  letter  from  Caswell,  Hewes  and  Hooper, 
all  dead,  to  a  copy  sent  to  the  dead  Caswell,  and  another 
sent  to  Doctor  Williamson,  now  probably  dead,  whose 
memory  did  not  recollect,  in  the  history  he  has  written  of 

*The  hoax  alluded  to  was  published  in  1812,  and  represented 
the  volcano  as  having  broken  out  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  Warm 
Springs,  in  Buncombe,  a  point  nearly  as  distant  from  the  county 
of  Mecklenburg  as  from  Monticello. 


236  Appendix  of  Documents 

North  Carolina,  this  gigantic  step  of  its  county  of  Mecklen 
burg"  &c.  &c. 

Without  further  remark  with  regard  to  the  first  point — 
the  quiz  about  the  volcano — or  the  second,  whether  the 
"spurious"  paper  was  really  published  in  the  Raleigh 
Register,  it  is  proper  to  say,  in  reply  to  the  third  argument, 
that  the  name  subscribed  is  real,  that  the  individual  still 
lives,  that  he  is  moreover  a  credible  witness,  and  that  it 
is  to  his  laudable  attention  and  exertions  that  the  State 
is  indebted  for  the  preservation  of  much  of  the  testimony 
which  is  now  offered  to  the  public.  The  fourth  argument 
demands,  and  will  receive  more  particular  attention  and 
examination. 

The  paper  appeals  to  a  book,  which  is  burnt;  to  Mr. 
Alexander,  who  is  dead;  to  Messrs.  Caswell,  Hooper  and 
Hewes,  all  dead;  to  a  copy  sent  to  "THE  DEAD  CASWELL," 
and  another,  sent  to  Doct.  Williamson,  probably  dead; 
are  the  consecutive  facts  which  Mr.  Jefferson  states,  and 
on  which  he  relies.  Admit  the  premises,  and  the  conclusion 
would  be  probable,  though  not  inevitable;  and  a  writer 
of  much  less  ability,  if  permitted  to  assume  his  facts, 
might  predicate  upon  them  not  only  a  very  plausible,  but 
an  unanswerable  argument.  The  very  fact,  however,  on 
which  Mr.  Jefferson  rests,  as  the  climax  of  improbabilities, 
is  not  only  not  proved  to  exist,  but,  upon  his  own  shewing, 
does  not  exist;  and  justifies  the  remark  in  the  outset,  that 
his  letter  was  written  in  haste,  upon  a  very  superficial  and 
imperfect  view  of  the  subject.  The  paper  does  not  appeal 
"TO  THE  DEAD  CASWELL,"  but  to  the  then  LIVING  DAVIE, 
a  native  of  the  section  of  country  in  which  the  event 
occurred,  like  the  former,  a  distinguished  hero  of  the 
revolution,  and,  in  every  respect,  a  proper  depositary  of 
the  record.  The  following  is  the  statement  in  question: 
(See  the  paper  A.)  ("The  foregoing  is  a  true  copy  of  the 
papers,  on  the  above  subject,  left  in  my  hands  by  John 
M'Nitt  Alexander,  dec'd.  I  find  it  mentioned  on  file,  that 
the  original  book  was  burned  April,  1800.  That  a  copy  of 


State   Pamphlet  237 

the  proceedings  was  sent  to  fHugh  Williamson,  in  New 
York,  then  writing  a  history  of  North  Carolina,  and  that  a 
copy  was  sent  to  Gen.  W.  R.  DAVIE.")  Gen.  Dame  died 
shortly  after  the  date  of  Mr.  Jefferson's  letter;  but  this 
identical  copy,  known  by  the  writer  of  these  remarks  to  be 
in  the  handwriting  of  John  M'Nitt  Alexander,  one  of  the 
Secretaries  of  the  Mecklenburg  meeting,  is  now  in  the 
Executive  Office  of  this  State.  (See  Doct.  Henderson's 
certificate,  B.)  Caswell,  Hooper  and  Hewes  are  all  dead; 
but  Capt.  Jack,  who  was  appointed  to  carry  to  them,  at 
Philadelphia,  this  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  lived  long 
enough  to  bear  testimony  to  the  truth ;  and  his  statement 
(C)  is  circumstantial,  explicit  and  satisfactory.  If  it  needed 
confirmation,  it  would  be  found  to  be  fully  sustained  by 
the  interesting  communication  (D)  of  the  late  Rev.  Francis 
Cummins,  D.  D.  of  Georgia,  to  the  Hon.  Nathaniel  Macon. 
More  satisfactory  evidence,  drawn  from  more  respectable 
sources,  Mr.  Jefferson,  if  alive,  could  not,  and  would  not 
require.  It  is  not  hazarding  too  much  to  say,  that  there  is 
no  one  event  of  the  Revolution  which  has  been,  or  can  be 
more  fully  or  clearly  authenticated. 

It  is,  perhaps,  needless  to  multiply  proofs,  or  to  extend 
this  article.  Col.  William  Polk  is  a  resident  of  this  city, 
a  venerable  remnant  of  the  revolutionary  stock,  has  passed 
the  common  boundary  of  human  life,  and  in  a  green  old 
age,  is  in  the  full  possession  of  his  faculties.  His  compa 
triots,  Caswell,  and  Hooper,  and  Hewes,  are  dead,  but  he 
lives,  was  present,  heard  his  father  proclaim  the  Declaration 

t  This  copy  the  writer  well  recollects  to  have  seen  in  the  possession 
of  Doct.  Williamson,  in  the  1793,  in  Fayetteville,  together  with  a 
letter  to  him  from  John  McNitt  Alexander,  and  to  have  conversed 
with  him  on  the  subject.  Why  it  is  not  mentioned  in  his  History, 
is  not  strange  to  any  one  who  knows  the  State,  and  has  read  the  book. 
It  cannot  be  regarded  as  a  history  of  any  country.  The  memorable 
Report  and  Resolutions  of  the  Congress  of  April,  1776,  are  alike 
unnoticed.  A  correct  and  satisfactory  account  of  both  proceedings, 
will  be  found  in  the  last  chapter  of  Martin's  History  of  North 
Carolina. 


238  Appendix  of  Documents 

to  the  assembled  multitude;  and  need  it  be  inquired,  in 
any  portion  of  this  Union,  if  he  will  be  believed? 

The  letter  (E)  of  Gen.  Joseph  Graham,  another  surviving 
officer  of  the  Revolution,  a  citizen  and  a  soldier  worthy 
of  the  best  days  of  the  Republic,  will  be  read  with  pleasure 
and  perfect  confidence  throughout  the  wide  range  of  his 
acquaintance. 

The  extract  from  the  memoir  of  the  late  Rev.  Humphrey 
Hunter,  (F)  of  Lincoln,  is  equally  explicit,  full  and  satis 
factory.  He,  with  several  other  respectable  gentlemen, 
whose  statements  are  appended,  was  an  eye  witness  of 
what  he  relates;  and  the  combined  testimony  of  all  these 
individuals  prove  the  existence  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declara 
tion,  and  all  the  circumstances  connected  with  it,  as  fully 
and  clearly  as  any  fact  can  be  shewn  by  human  testimony. 

The  following  extract  from  "The  Journal  of  the  Provin 
cial  Congress  of  North  Carolina,  held  at  Halifax,  on  the 
4th  of  April,  1776,"  (pa.  n,  12,)  shews  that  the  first  legis 
lative  recommendation  of  a  DECLARATION  OF  INDEPENDENCE 
by  the  CONTINENTAL  CONGRESS,  originated  likewise  in  the 
State  of  North  Carolina.  It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that 
John  McNitt  Alexander,  the  Secretary  of  the  meeting, 
Waightstell  Avery,  John  Pfifer  and  Robert  Irwin,  who  were 
conspicuous  actors  in  the  proceedings  in  Mecklenburg, 
were  active  and  influential  members  of  this  Provincial 
Congress. 

"The  select  committee  to  take  into  consideration  the 
usurpations  and  violences  attempted  and  committed  by 
the  King  and  Parliament  of  Britain  against  America,  and 
the  further  measures  to  be  taken  for  frustrating  the  same, 
and  for  the  better  defence  of  this  Province,  reported  as 
follows,  to  wit: 

"It  appears  to  your  committee,  that  pursuant  to  the 
plan  concerted  by  the  British  Ministry  for  subjugating 
America,  the  King  and  Parliament  of  Great  Britain  have 
usurped  a  power  over  the  persons  and  properties  of  the 


State  Pamphlet  239 

people  unlimited  and  uncontrouled ;  and  disregarding 
their  humble  petitions  for  peace,  liberty  and  safety,  have 
made  divers  legislative  acts,  denouncing  war,  famine,  and 
every  species  of  calamity,  against  the  Continent  in  general. 
The  British  fleets  and  armies  have  been,  and  still  are  daily 
employed  in  destroying  the  people,  and  committing  the 
most  horrid  devastations  on  the  country.  That  Governors 
in  different  Colonies  have  declared  protection  to  slaves, 
who  should  imbrue  their  hands  in  the  blood  of  their  masters. 
That  the  ships  belonging  to  America  are  declared  prizes 
of  war,  and  many  of  them  have  been  violently  seized  and 
confiscated.  In  consequence  of  all  which  multitudes  of  the 
people  have  been  destroyed,  or  from  easy  circumstances 
reduced  to  the  most  lamentable  distress. 

"And  whereas  the  moderation  hitherto  manifested  by 
the  United  Colonies,  and  their  sincere  desire  to  be  recon 
ciled  to  the  mother  country  on  constitutional  principles, 
have  procured  no  mitigation  of  the  aforesaid  wrongs  and 
usurpations,  and  no  hopes  remain  of  obtaining  redress  by 
those  means  alone  which  have  been  hitherto  tried,  your 
committee  are  of  opinion  that  the  House  should  enter 
into  the  following  resolve,  to  wit: 

"Resolved,  That  the  DELEGATES  FOR  THIS  COLONY  IN 
THE  CONTINENTAL  CONGRESS  BE  IMPOWERED  TO  CONCUR 
WITH  THE  DELEGATES  OF  THE  OTHER  COLONIES  IN  DECLAR 
ING  INDEPENDENCY,  AND  FORMING  FOREIGN  ALLIANCES, 
reserving  to  this  Colony  the  sole  and  exclusive  right  of 
forming  a  Constitution  and  laws  for  this  Colony,  and  of 
appointing  Delegates  from  time  to  time,  (under  the  direc 
tion  of  a  general  representation  thereof,)  to  meet  the 
Delegates  of  the  other  Colonies,  for  such  purposes  as  shall 
be  hereafter  pointed  out. 

"The  Congress  taking  the  same  into  consideration, 
unanimously  concurred  therewith." 

The  striking  similarity  of  expression  in  the  concluding 
sentences  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  and  the  Declara 
tion  by  Congress  on  the  4th  of  July,  1776,  has  been  repeat- 


240  Appendix  of  Documents 

edly  urged  and  relied  upon  as  disproving  the  authenticity 
of  the  former.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  reply  to  this 
suggestion.  It  is  not  very  strange  that  men  who  think 
alike  should  speak  alike  upon  the  same  subject,  more 
especially  when  high  toned  patriotic  feeling  seeks  for 
utterance.  This  similarity  of  expression  is  not  confined, 
however,  to  these  two  papers.  A  comparison  of  the  fore 
going  resolutions  with  the  Declaration,  as  drawn  by  Mr. 
Jefferson,  will  satisfy  the  most  credulous  upon  this  subject. 
Who  suspects  Mr.  Jefferson  of  intentional  plagiarism?  and 
yet  he  might  be  charged  with  having  appropriated  the  lan 
guage  of  the  Provincial  Legislature,  with  at  least  as  much 
propriety  as  Mr.  Alexander  with  having  forged  the  Meck 
lenburg  Declaration.  The  sentiments  embodied  by  Mr. 
Jefferson  were  not  peculiar  to  himself,  but  adopted  by  him 
as  expressive  of  the  common  feeling  in  the  common 
language  of  that  eventful  period. 


DECLARATION  OF  INDEPENDENCE 

AND 

ACCOMPANYING  DOCUMENTS. 


REPORT  AND  RESOLUTIONS. 


Adopted  by  the  General  Assembly  at  the  session  of  iSjo-^i,  upon 
which  this  publication  is  predicated. 


The  committee  to  whom  it  was  referred  to  examine, 
collate  and  arrange  in  proper  order  such  parts  of  the 
Journals  of  the  Provincial  Assemblies  of  North  Carolina, 
as  relate  to  the  Declaration  of  American  Independence; 
also  such  documents  as  relate  to  the  Declaration  of  Inde 
pendence  made  by  the  patriotic  men  of  Mecklenburg  in 
May,  1775;  and  also  such  measures  as  relate  to  the  same 
cause,  adopted  by  the  freemen  of  Cumberland  county, 
previous  to  the  fourth  of  July,  1776,  in  order  to  the  publi 
cation  and  distribution  of  such  documents,  having  per 
formed  the  duty  assigned  them,  respectfully  report: 

That  upon  an  attentive  examination  of  the  Journals 
of  the  Provincial  Assembly  of  North  Carolina,  which  met 
at  Halifax  in  the  month  of  April,  1776,  the  committee  are 
of  opinion,  that  no  selection  could  be  made  from  the  said 
Journal  to  answer  the  purpose  of  the  House.  But  as 
every  thing  relating  to  that  period,  must  be  interesting 
to  those  who  value  the  blessing  of  national  independence, 
the  committee  recommend  that  the  whole  of  the  Journal 

241 


242  Appendix  of  Documents 

be  printed,  and  receive  the  same  extended  distribution 
which  the  resolution  of  the  House  contemplates  for  the 
proceedings  in  Mecklenburg  and  Cumberland.  This  course 
is  deemed  by  the  committee  the  more  proper,  because  the 
Journal  is  now  out  of  print,  and  it  is  highly  probable  that 
the  copy  in  the  possession  of  the  committee  is  the  only 
one  now  extant. 

Your  committee  have  also  examined,  collated  and  ar 
ranged,  all  the  documents  which  have  been  accessible  to 
them,  touching  the  Declaration  of  Independence  by  the 
citizens  of  Mecklenburg,  and  the  proceedings  of  the  freemen 
of  Cumberland. 

By  the  publication  of  these  papers,  it  will  be  fully  veri 
fied,  that  as  early  as  the  month  of  May,  1775,  a  portion  of 
the  people  of  North  Carolina,  sensible  that  their  wrongs 
could  no  longer  be  borne,  without  sacrificing  both  safety 
and  honor,  and  that  redress  so  often  sought,  so  patiently 
waited  for,  and  so  cruelly  delayed,  was  no  longer  to  be 
expected,  did,  by  a  public  and  solemn  act,  declare  the 
dissolution  of  the  ties  which  bound  them  to  the  crown  and 
people  of  Great  Britain,  and  did  establish  an  independent, 
though  temporary  government  for  their  own  control  and 
direction. 

This  first  claim  of  Independence  evinces  such  high  senti 
ments  of  valor  and  patriotism,  that  we  cannot,  and  ought 
not  lightly  to  esteem  the  honor  of  having  made  it.  The  fact 
of  the  Declaration  should  be  announced,  its  language 
should  be  published  and  perpetuated,  and  the  names  of 
the  gallant  representatives  of  Mecklenburg,  with  whom  it 
originated,  should  be  preserved  from  an  oblivion,  which, 
should  it  involve  them,  would  as  much  dishonor  us,  as 
injure  them.  If  the  thought  of  Independence  did  not  first 
occur  to  them,  to  them,  at  least,  belongs  the  proud  dis 
tinction  of  having  first  given  language  to  the  thought; 
and  it  should  be  known,  and,  fortunately,  it  can  still  be 
conclusively  established,  that  the  revolution  received  its 
first  impulse  towards  Independence,  however  feeble  that 


State   Pamphlet  243 

impulse  might  have  been,  in  North  Carolina.  The  com 
mittee  are  aware  that  this  assertion  has  elsewhere  been 
received  with  doubt,  and  at  times  met  with  denial;  and  it 
is,  therefore,  believed  to  be  more  strongly  incumbent  upon 
the  House  to  usher  to  the  world  the  Mecklenburg  Declara 
tion,  accompanied  with  such  testimonials  of  its  genuineness, 
as  shall  silence  incredulity,  and  with  such  care  for  its 
general  diffusion,  as  shall  forever  secure  it  from  being 
forgotten.  And  in  recounting  the  causes,  the  origin  and 
the  progress  of  our  revolutionary  struggle,  till  its  final 
issue  in  acknowledged  independence,  whatever  the  brilliant 
achievements  of  other  States  may  have  been,  let  it  never 
be  forgotten,  that  at  a  period  of  darkness  and  oppression, 
without  concert  with  others,  without  assurances  of  support 
from  any  quarter,  a  few  gallant  North  Carolinians,  all 
fear  of  consequences  lost  in  a  sense  of  their  country's 
wrongs,  relying,  under  Heaven,  solely  upon  themselves, 
nobly  dared  to  assert,  and  resolved  to  maintain  that 
independence,  of  which,  whoever  might  have  thought, 
none  had  then  spoken;  and  thus  earned  for  themselves, 
and  for  their  fellow-citizens  of  North  Carolina,  the  honor 
of  giving  birth  to  the  first  Declaration  of  Independence. 

The  committee  respectfully  recommend   the   adoption 
of  the  following  resolutions. 
All  of  which  is  submitted. 

THOS  G.  POLK,  Chr'n 
JOHN  BRAGG, 
EVAN  ALEXANDER, 
LOUIS  D.  HENRY, 
ALEX.  M'NEILL. 

Resolved,  That  his  Excellency  the  Governor  be  directed 
to  cause  to  be  published  in  pamphlet  form  the  above 
Report  and  the  accompanying  documents,  in  the  manner 
and  order  following,  viz.  After  the  Report,  first,  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration,  with  the  names  of  the  Delegates 
composing  the  meeting;  second,  the  Certificates,  testifying 


244  Appendix  of  Documents 

to  the  circumstances  attending  the  Declaration;  third, 
the  proceedings  of  the  Cumberland  Association;  and  that 
he  be  further  directed  to  have  reprinted  in  like  manner, 
separate  and  distinct  from  the  above,  the  accompanying 
Journal  of  the  Provincial  Assembly,  held  at  Halifax  in 
one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  seventy-six. 

Resolved  further,  That  after  publication,  the  Governor 
be  instructed  to  distribute  said  documents  as  follows,  to 
wit:  Twenty  copies  of  each  to  the  Library  of  the  State; 
to  each  of  the  Libraries  at  the  University,  ten  copies;  to 
the  Library  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  ten 
copies;  and  one  copy  to  each  of  the  Executives  of  the 
several  States  of  the  Union. 

DECLARATION  OF  INDEPENDENCE. 

May  20,  1775. 

NAMES  OP  THE  DELEGATES  PRESENT. 

Col.  Thomas  Polk,  John  M'Knitt  Alexander, 

Ephraim  Brevard,  Hezekiah  Alexander, 

Hezekiah  J.  Balch,  Adam  Alexander, 

John  Phifer,  Charles  Alexander, 

James  Harris,  Zacheus  Wilson,  Sen. 

William  Kennon,  Waightstill  Avery, 

John  Ford,  Benjamin  Patton, 

Richard  Barry,  Matthew  M'Clure, 

Henry  Downs,  Neil  Morrison, 

Ezra  Alexander,  Robert  Irwin, 

William  Graham,  John  Flenniken, 

John  Queary,  David  Reese, 

Abraham  Alexander,  Richard  Harris,  Sen. 

ABRAHAM  ALEXANDER  was  appointed  Chairman,  and 
JOHN  M'KNITT  ALEXANDER  Clerk.  The  following  resolu 
tions  were  offered,  viz. 

i st.  Resolved,  That  whosoever  directly  or  indirectly 
abetted,  or  in  any  way,  form  or  manner,  countenanced 


State   Pamphlet  245 

the  unchartered  and  dangerous  invasion  of  our  rights,  as 
claimed  by  Great  Britain,  is  an  enemy  to  this  country,  to 
America,  and  to  the  inherent  and  inalienable  rights  of  man. 

2d.  Resolved,  That  we,  the  citizens  of  Mecklenburg 
county,  do  hereby  dissolve  the  political  bands  which  have 
connected  us  to  the  mother  country,  and  hereby  absolve 
ourselves  from  all  allegiance  to  the  British  Crown,  and 
abjure  all  political  connection,  contract,  or  association, 
with  that  nation,  who  have  wantonly  trampled  on  our 
rights  and  liberties,  and  inhumanly  shed  the  blood  of 
American  patriots  at  Lexington. 

3d.  Resolved,  That  we  do  hereby  declare  ourselves  a 
free  and  independent  people ;  are,  and  of  right  ought  to  be? 
a  sovereign  and  self-governing  Association,  under  the 
control  of  no  power  other  than  that  of  our  God  and  the 
general  government  of  the  Congress;  to  the  maintenance 
of  which  independence,  we  solemnly  pledge  to  each  other 
our  mutual  co-operation,  our  lives,  our  fortunes,  and  our 
most  sacred  honor. 

4th.  Resolved,  That  as  we  now  acknowledge  the  existence 
and  control  of  no  law  or  legal  officer,  civil  or  military, 
within  this  county,  we  do  hereby  ordain  and  adopt  as  a 
rule  of  life,  all,  each  and  every  of  our  former  laws, — 
wherein,  nevertheless,  the  crown  of  Great  Britain  never 
can  be  considered  as  holding  rights,  privileges,  immunities 
or  authority  therein. 

5th.  Resolved,  That  it  is  further  decreed,  that  all,  each 
and  every  military  officer  in  this  county,  is  hereby  rein 
stated  in  his  former  command  and  authority,  he  acting 
conformably  to  these  regulations.  And  that  every  mem 
ber  present,  of  this  delegation,  shall  henceforth  be  a  civil 
officer,  viz.  a  Justice  of  the  Peace,  in  the  character  of  a 
"Committee-man,"  to  issue  process,  hear  and  determine 
all  matters  of  controversy,  according  to  said  adopted 
laws,  and  to  preserve  peace,  union  and  harmony  in  said 
county; — and  to  use  every  exertion  to  spread  the  love  of 
country  and  fire  of  freedom  throughout  America,  until 


246  Appendix  of  Documents 

a  more  general  and  organized  government  be  established  in 
this  province. 

After  discussing  the  foregoing  resolves,  and  arranging 
bye-laws  and  regulations  for  the  government  of  a  Standing 
Committee  of  Public  Safety,  who  were  selected  from  these 
delegates,  the  whole  proceedings  were  unanimously  adopted 
and  signed.  A  select  committee  was  then  appointed  to 
draw  a  more  full  and  definite  statement  of  grievances* 
and  a  more  formal  declaration  of  independence.  The 
Delegation  then  adjourned  about  2  o'clock,  A.M.  May  20. 


A 

FROM  THE  RALEIGH  REGISTER,  OP  APRIL  30,  1819. 

It  is  not  probably  known  to  many  of  our  readers,  that  the  citizens 
of  Mecklenburg  county,  in  this  State,  made  Declaration  of  In 
dependence  more  than  a  year  before  Congress  made  theirs.  The 
following  Document  on  the  subject  has  lately  come  to  the  hands 
of  the  Editor  from  unquestionable  authority,  and  is  published 
that  it  may  go  down  to  posterity. 

NORTH  CAROLINA,  MECKLENBURG  COUNTY,  ) 

May  20,  1775.       ) 

In  the  spring  of  1775,  the  leading  characters  of  Mecklen 
burg  county,  stimulated  by  that  enthusiastic  patriotism 
which  elevates  the  mind  above  considerations  of  individual 
aggrandizement,  and  scorning  to  shelter  themselves  from 
the  impending  storm  by  submission  to  lawless  power,  &c. 
&c.  held  several  detached  meetings,  in  each  of  which  the 
individual  sentiments  were,  "that  the  cause  of  Boston  was 
the  cause  of  all;  that  their  destinies  were  indissolubly 
connected  with  those  of  their  Eastern  fellow-citizens — 
and  that  they  must  either  submit  to  all  the  impositions 
which  an  unprincipled,  and  to  them  an  unrepresented, 
Parliament  might  impose — or  support  their  brethren  who 
were  doomed  to  sustain  the  first  shock  of  that  power, 
which,  if  successful  there,  would  ultimately  overwhelm  all 
in  the  common  calamity. "  Conformably  to  these  principles, 


State  Pamphlet  247 

Colonel  T.  Polk,  through  solicitation,  issued  an  order  to 
each  Captain's  company  in  the  county  of  Mecklenburg, 
(then  comprising  the  present  county  of  Cabarrus,)  directing 
each  militia  company  to  elect  two  persons,  and  delegate  to 
them  ample  power  to  devise  ways  and  means  to  aid  and 
assist  their  suffering  brethren  in  Boston,  and  also  generally 
to  adopt  measures  to  extricate  themselves  from  the  im 
pending  storm,  and  to  secure  unimpaired  their  inalienable 
rights,  privileges  and  liberties,  from  the  dominant  grasp 
of  British  imposition  and  tyranny. 

In  conformity  to  said  order,  on  the  ipth  of  May,  1775, 
the  said  delegation  met  in  Charlotte,  vested  with  unlimited 
powers;  at  which  time  official  news,  by  express,  arrived 
of  the  battle  of  Lexington  on  that  day  of  the  preceding 
month.  Every  delegate  felt  the  value  and  importance  of 
the  prize,  and  the  awful  and  solemn  crisis  which  had  ar 
rived — every  bosom  swelled  with  indignation  at  the  malice, 
inveteracy,  and  insatiable  revenge,  developed  in  the  late 
attack  at  Lexington.  The  universal  sentiment  was:  let 
us  not  flatter  ourselves  that  popular  harangues,  or  resolves; 
that  popular  vapour  will  avert  the  storm,  or  vanquish 
our  common  enemy — let  us  deliberate — let  us  calculate 
the  issue — the  probable  result;  and  then  let  us  act  with 
energy,  as  brethren  leagued  to  preserve  our  property — 
our  lives — and  what  is  still  more  endearing,  the  liberties 
of  America.  Abraham  Alexander  was  then  elected  Chair 
man,  and  John  M'Knitt  Alexander,  Clerk.  After  a  free 
and  full  discussion  of  the  various  objects  for  which  the 
delegation  had  been  convened,  it  was  unanimously  or 
dained — 

1 .  Resolved,  That  whoever  directly  or  indirectly  abetted, 
or  in  any  way,  form  or  manner,  countenanced  the  unchar- 
tered  and  dangerous  invasion  of  our  rights,  as  claimed  by 
Great  Britain,  is  an  enemy  to  this  country — to  America — 
and  to  the  inherent  and  inalienable  rights  of  man. 

2 .  Resolved,  That  we  the  citizens  of  Mecklenburg  county, 
do  hereby  dissolve  the  political  bands  which  have  connected 


248  Appendix  of  Documents 

us  to  the  Mother  Country,  and  hereby  absolve  ourselves 
from  all  allegiance  to  the  British  Crown,  and  abjure  all 
political  connection,  contract,  or  association,  with  that 
nation,  who  have  wantonly  trampled  on  our  rights  and 
liberties — and  inhumanly  shed  the  innocent  blood  of 
American  patriots  at  Lexington. 

3.  Resolved,   That  we  do   hereby  declare  ourselves  a 
free  and  independent  people,  are,  and  of  right  ought  to  be, 
a   sovereign    and    self-governing   Association,   under   the 
control  of  no  power  other  than  that  of  our  God  and  the 
General  Government  of  the  Congress;  to  the  maintenance 
of  which  independence,  we  solemnly  pledge  to  each  other, 
our  mutual  co-operation,  our  lives,  our  fortunes,  and  our 
most  sacred  honor. 

4.  Resolved,  That  as  we  now  acknowledge  the  existence 
and  control  of  no  law  or  legal  officer,  civil  or  military, 
within  this  county,  we  do  hereby  ordain  and  adopt,  as  a 
rule  of  life,  all,  each  and  every  of  our  former  laws,  wherein, 
nevertheless,  the  Crown  of  Great  Britain  never  can  be 
considered   as   holding  rights,   privileges,   immunities,   or 
authority  therein. 

5.  Resolved,  That  it  is  also  further  decreed,  that  all, 
each  and  every  military  officer  in  this  county,  is  hereby 
reinstated  to  his  former  command  and  authority,  he  acting 
conformably  to  these  regulations.    And  that  every  member 
present  of  this  delegation  shall  henceforth  be  a  civil  officer, 
viz.  a  Justice  of  the  Peace,  in  the  character  of  a  "  Committee- 
man"  to  issue  process,  hear  and  determine  all  matters  of 
controversy,  according  to  said  adopted  laws,  and  to  pre 
serve   peace,  and   union,  and   harmony,  in   said   county, 
and  to  use  every  exertion  to  spread  the  love  of  country 
and  fire  of  freedom  throughout  America,  until  a  more 
general  and  organized  government  be  established  in  this 
province. 


A  number  of  bye  laws  were  also  added,  merely  to  protect 


State  Pamphlet  249 

the  association  from  confusion,  and  to  regulate  their  general 
conduct  as  citizens.  After  sitting  in  the  Court  House  all 
night,  neither  sleepy,  hungry,  nor  fatigued,  and  after  dis 
cussing  every  paragraph,  they  were  all  passed,  sanctioned, 
and  decreed,  unanimously,  about  2  o'clock,  A.  M.  May  20. 
In  a  few  days,  a  deputation  of  said  delegation  convened, 
when  Capt.  James  Jack,  of  Charlotte,  was  deputed  as 
express  to  the  Congress  at  Philadelphia,  with  a  copy  of  said 
Resolves  and  Proceedings,  together  with  a  letter  addressed 
to  our  three  representatives  there,  viz.  Richard  Caswell, 
William  Hooper  and  Joseph  Hughes — under  express  injunc 
tion,  personally,  and  through  the  State  representation,  to 
use  all  possible  means  to  have  said  proceedings  sanctioned 
and  approved  by  the  General  Congress.  On  the  return 
of  Captain  Jack,  the  delegation  learned  that  their  pro 
ceedings  were  individually  approved  by  the  Members  of 
Congress,  but  that  it  was  deemed  premature  to  lay  them 
before  the  House.  A  joint  letter  from  said  three  members 
of  Congress  was  also  received,  complimentary  of  the  zeal 
in  the  common  cause,  and  recommending  perseverance, 
order  and  energy. 

The  subsequent  harmony,  unanimity,  and  exertion  in 
the  cause  of  liberty  and  independence,  evidently  resulting 
from  these  regulations,  and  the  continued  exertion  of  said 
delegation,  apparently  tranquilised  this  section  of  the 
State,  and  met  with  the  concurrence  and  high  approbation 
of  the  Council  of  Safety,  who  held  their  sessions  at  Newbern 
and  Wilmington,  alternately,  and  who  confirmed  the 
nomination  and  acts  of  the  delegation  in  their  official 
capacity. 

From  this  delegation  originated  the  Court  of  Enquiry  of 
this  county,  who  constituted  and  held  their  first  session  in 
Charlotte — they  then  held  their  meetings  regularly  at 
Charlotte,  at  Col.  James  Harris's,  and  at  Col.  Phifers, 
alternately,  one  week  at  each  place.  It  was  a  Civil  Court 
founded  on  military  process.  Before  this  Judicature,  all 
suspicious  persons  were  made  to  appear,  who  were  formally 


250  Appendix  of  Documents 

tried  and  banished,  or  continued  under  guard.  Its  juris 
diction  was  as  unlimited  as  toryism,  and  its  decrees  as  final 
as  the  confidence  and  patriotism  of  the  county.  Several 
were  arrested  and  brought  before  them  from  Lincoln, 
Rowan  and  the  adjacent  counties. 

[The  foregoing  is  a  true  copy  of  the  papers  on  the  above 
subject,  left  in  my  hands  by  John  M'Knitt  Alexander, 
dec'd.  I  find  it  mentioned  on  file  that  the  original  book  was 
burned  April,  1800.  That  a  copy  of  the  proceedings  was 
sent  to  Hugh  Williamson,  in  New  York,  then  writing  a 
History  of  North  Carolina,  and  that  a  copy  was  sent  to 
Gen.  W.  R.  Davie. 

J.  M'KNITT.] 


B 

STATE  OF  NORTH  CAROLINA, ) 
MECKLENBURG  COUNTY.  ) 

I,  Samuel  Henderson,  do  hereby  certify,  that  the  paper 
annexed  was  obtained  by  me  from  Maj.  William  Davie  in 
its  present  situation,  soon  after  the  death  of  his  father, 
Gen.  William  R.  Davie,  and  given  to  Doct.  Joseph  M'Knitt 
by  me.  In  searching  for  some  particular  paper,  I  came 
across  this,  and,  knowing  the  hand  writing  of  John  M'Knitt 
Alexander,  took  it  up,  and  examined  it.  Maj.  Davie  said  to 
me  (when  asked  how  it  became  torn)  his  sisters  had  torn 
it,  not  knowing  what  it  was. 

Given  under  my  hand,  this  25th  Nov.  1830. 

SAM.  HENDERSON. 

[Note. — To  this  certificate  of  Doct.  Henderson  is  annexed  the 
copy  of  the  paper  A,  originally  deposited  by  John  M'Knitt  Alex 
ander  in  the  hands  of  Gen.  Davie,  whose  name  seems  to  have  been 
mistaken  by  Mr.  Jefferson  for  that  of  Gov.  Caswell.  See  preface, 
pages  v  &  vi.  This  paper  is  somewhat  torn,  but  is  entirely  legible, 
and  constitutes  the  "solemn  and  positive  proof  of  authenticity,'' 
which  Mr.  Jefferson  required,  and  which  would  doubtless  have  been 
satisfactory,  had  it  been  submitted  to  him.] 


State  Pamphlet  251 

C 

CAPTAIN  JACK'S  CERTIFICATE. 

Having  seen  in  the  newspapers  some  pieces  respecting 
the  Declaration  of  Independence  by  the  people  of  Mecklen 
burg  county,  in  the  State  of  North  Carolina,  in  May,  1775, 
and  being  solicited  to  state  what  I  know  of  that  transaction ; 
I  would  observe,  that  for  some  time  previous  to,  and  at 
the  time  those  resolutions  were  agreed  upon,  I  resided  in 
the  town  of  Charlotte,  Mecklenburg  county;  was  privy 
to  a  number  of  meetings  of  some  of  the  most  influential 
and  leading  characters  of  that  county  on  the  subject, 
before  the  final  adoption  of  the  resolutions — and  at  the 
time  they  were  adopted;  among  those  who  appeared  to 
take  the  lead,  may  be  mentioned  Hezekiah  Alexander,  who 
generally  acted  as  Chairman,  John  M'Knitt  Alexander,  as 
Secretary,  Abraham  Alexander,  Adam  Alexander,  Maj.  John 
Davidson,Maj.  (afterwards)  Gen.  Wm. Davidson, Col. Thomas 
Polk,  Ezekiel  Polk,  Dr.  Ephraim  Brevard,  Samuel  Martin, 
Duncan  Ochletree,  William  Willson,  Robert  Irvin. 

When  the  resolutions  were  finally  agreed  on,  they  were 
publicly  proclaimed  from  the  court-house  door  in  the  town 
of  Charlotte,  and  received  with  every  demonstration  of  joy 
by  the  inhabitants. 

I  was  then  solicited  to  be  the  bearer  of  the  proceedings  to 
Congress.  I  set  out  the  following  month,  say  June,  and  in 
passing  through  Salisbury,  the  General  Court  was  sitting — 
at  the  request  of  the  court  I  handed  a  copy  of  the  resolu 
tions  to  Col.  Kennon,  an  Attorney,  and  they  were  read 
aloud  in  open  court.  Major  William  Davidson,  and  Mr. 
Avery,  an  attorney,  called  on  me  at  my  lodgings  the 
evening  after,  and  observed,  they  had  heard  of  but  one 
person,  (a  Mr.  Beard)  but  approved  of  them. 

I  then  proceeded  on  to  Philadelphia,  and  delivered  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Independence  of  May,  1775, 
to  Richard  Caswell  and  William  Hooper,  the  Delegates  to 
Congress  from  the  State  of  North-Carolina. 


252  Appendix  of  Documents 

I  am  now  in  the  eighty-eighth  year  of  my  age,  residing  in 
the  county  of  Elbert,  in  the  State  of  Georgia.  I  was  in 
the  Revolutionary  War,  from  the  commencement  to  the 
close.  I  would  further  observe,  that  the  Rev.  Francis 
Cummins,  a  Presbyterian  Clergyman,  of  Greene  county, 
in  this  State,  was  a  student  in  the  town  of  Charlotte  at 
the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  resolutions,  and  is  as  well, 
or  perhaps  better  acquainted  with  the  proceedings  at  that 
time,  than  any  man  now  living. 

Col.  William  Polk,  of  Raleigh,  in  North-Carolina,  was 
living  with  his  father  Thomas,  in  Charlotte,  at  the  time  I 
have  been  speaking  of,  and  although  then  too  young  to  be 
forward  in  the  business,  yet  the  leading  circumstances  I 
have  related  cannot  have  escaped  his  recollection. 

JAMES  JACK. 
Signed  this  7th  Dec.  1819,  in  presence  of 

JOB  WESTON,  C.  C.  O. 

JAMES  OLIVER,  Atto.  at  Law. 


G  2 

NORTH  CAROLINA, 
Cabarrus  County,  Nov.  29,  1830. 

We,  the  undersigned,  do  hereby  certify  that  we  have 
frequently  heard  William  S.  Alexander,  dec'd,  say  that  he, 
the  said  Wm.  S.  Alexander,  was  at  Philadelphia,  on  mer 
cantile  business,  in  the  early  part  of  the  summer  of  1775, 
say  in  June;  and  that  on  the  day  that  Gen.  Washington 
left  Philadelphia  to  take  the  command  of  the  Northern 
army,  he,  the  said  Wm.  S.  Alexander,  met  with  Capt. 
James  Jack,  who  informed  him,  the  said  William  S.  Alex 
ander,  that  he,  the  said  James  Jack,  was  there  as  the  agent 
or  bearer  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  made  in 
Charlotte,  on  the  twentieth  day  of  May,  seventeen  hundred 
and  seventy-five,  by  the  citizens  of  Mecklenburg,  then 
including  Cabarrus,  with  instructions  to  present  the  same 
to  the  Delegates  from  North  Carolina,  and  by  them  to  be 


State  Pamphlet  253 

laid  before  Congress,  and  which  he  said  he  had  done;  in 
which  Declaration  the  aforesaid  citizens  of  Mecklenburg 
renounced  their  allegiance  to  the  crown  of  Great  Britain, 
and  set  up  a  government  for  themselves,  under  the  title  of 
The  Committee  of  Safety. 

Given  under  our  hands  the  date  above  written. 

ALPHONSO  ALEXANDER, 
AMOS  ALEXANDER, 
J.  M'KNITT. 


Lexington,  (Georgia,)  November  16,  1819. 

DEAR  SIR, — The  bearer,  the  Hon.  Thomas  W.  Cobb,  has 
suggested  to  me  that  you  had  a  desire  to  know  something 
particularly  of  the  proceedings  of  the  citizens  of  Mecklen 
burg  county,  in  North-Carolina,  about  the  beginning  of 
our  Revolutionary  War. 

Previous  to  my  becoming  more  particular,  I  will  suppose 
you  remember  the  Regulation  business,  which  took  its  rise 
in  or  before  the  year  1770,  and  issued  and  ended  in  a  battle 
between  the  Regulators  and  Governor  Tryon,  in  the  spring 
of  1 7 7 1 .  Some  of  the  Regulators  were  killed,  and  the  whole 
dispersed.  The  Regulators'  conduct  "was  a  rudis  indiges- 
taque  moles,"  as  Ovid  says,  about  the  beginning  of  creation; 
but  the  embryotic  principles  of  the  Revolution  were  in 
their  temper  and  views.  They  wanted  strength,  consistency, 
a  Congress  and  a  Washington  at  their  head.  Tryon  sent 
his  officers  and  minions  through  the  State,  and  imposed 
the  oath  of  allegiance  upon  the  people,  even  as  far  up  as 
Mecklenburg  county.  In  the  year  1775,  after  our  Revo 
lution  began,  the  principal  characters  of  Mecklenburg 
county  met  on  two  sundry  days,  in  Queen's  Museum  in 
Charlotte,  to  digest  Articles  for  a  State  Constitution,  in 
anticipation  that  the  Province  would  proceed  to  do  so. 
In  this  business  the  leading  characters  were,  the  Rev. 


254  Appendix  of  Documents 

Hezekiah  James  Balch,  a  graduate  of  Princeton  College, 
an  elegant  scholar,  Waightstill  Avery,  Esq.  Attorney  at 
Law;  Hezekiah  and  John  M'Knitt  Alexander,  Esqrs.  Col. 
Thomas  Polk,  &c.  &c. 

Many  men,  and  young  men,  (myself  one)  before  magis 
trates,  abjured  allegiance  to  George  III,  or  any  other 
foreign  power.  At  length,  in  the  same  year,  1775,  I  think 
at  least  positively  before  July  4th,  1776,  the  males  gener 
ally  of  that  county,  met  on  a  certain  day  in  Charlotte,  and 
from  the  head  of  the  court-house  stairs  proclaimed  Inde 
pendence  on  English  Government,  by  their  herald  Col. 
Thomas  Polk.  I  was  present,  and  saw  and  heard  it,  and 
as  a  young  man,  and  then  a  student  in  Queen's  Museum, 
was  an  agent  in  these  things.  I  did  not  then  take  and  keep 
the  dates,  and  cannot,  as  to  date,  be  so  particular  as  I 
could  wish.  Capt.  James  Jack,  then  of  Charlotte,  but  now 
of  Elbert  county,  in  Georgia,  was  sent  with  the  account  of 
these  proceedings  to  Congress,  then  in  Philadelphia — and 
brought  back  to  the  county,  the  thanks  of  Congress  for 
their  zeal — and  the  advice  of  Congress  to  be  a  little  more 
patient,  until  Congress  should  take  the  measures  thought 
to  be  best. 

I  would  suppose,  sir,  that  some  minutes  of  these  things 
must  be  found  among  the  records  of  the  first  Congress,  that 
would  perfectly  settle  their  dates.     I  am  perfectly  sure 
being  present  at  the  whole  of  them,  they  were  before  our 
National  Declaration  of  Independence. 

Hon.  Sir,  if  the  above  few  things  can  afford  you  any 
gratification,  it  will  add  to  the  happiness  of  your  friend  and 

humble  servant. 

FRANCIS  CUMMINS. 
HON.  NATHANIEL  MACON. 


E 

Vesuvius  Furnace,  tfh  October,  1830. 

DEAR  SIR, — Agreeably  to  your  request,  I  will  give  you 


State  Pamphlet  255 

the  details  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Independence 
on  the  2oth  of  May,  1775,  as  well  as  I  can  recollect  after  a 
lapse  of  fifty-five  years.  I  was  then  a  lad  about  half  grown, 
was  present  on  that  occasion  (a  looker  on.) 

During  the  Winter  and  Spring  preceding  that  event, 
several  popular  meetings  of  the  people  were  held  in  Char 
lotte;  two  of  which  I  attended. — Papers  were  read,  griev 
ances  stated,  and  public  measures  discussed.  As  printing 
was  not  then  common  in  the  South,  the  papers  were  mostly 
manuscript ;  one  or  more  of  which  was  from  the  pen  of  the 
Reverend  Doctor  Reese,  (then  of  Mecklenburg,)  which  met 
with  general  approbation,  and  copies  of  it  circulated.  It 
is  to  be  regretted  that  those  and  other  papers  published  at 
that  period,  and  the  journal  of  their  proceedings,  are  lost. — 
They  would  show  much  of  the  spirit  and  tone  of  thinking 
which  prepared  them  for  the  measures  they  afterwards 
adopted. 

On  the  2oth  of  May,  1775,  besides  the  two  persons 
elected  from  each  militia  company,  (usually  called  Com 
mittee-men,)  a  much  larger  number  of  citizens  attended 
in  Charlotte  than  at  any  former  meeting — perhaps  half 
the  men  in  the  county.  The  news  of  the  battle  of  Lexing 
ton,  the  1 9th  of  April  preceding,  had  arrived.  There 
appeared  among  the  people  much  excitement.  The 
committee  were  organized  in  the  court  house  by  ap 
pointing  Abraham  Alexander,  Esq.  Chairman,  and 
John  M'Knitt  Alexander,  Esq.  Clerk  or  Secretary  to  the 
meeting. 

After  reading  a  number  of  papers  as  usual,  and  much 
animated  discussion,  the  question  was  taken,  and  they 
resolved  to  declare  themselves  independent.  One  among 
other  reasons  offered,  that  the  King  or  Ministry  had,  by 
proclamation  or  some  edict,  declared  the  Colonies  out  of 
the  protection  of  the  British  Crown;  they  ought,  therefore, 
to  declare  themselves  out  of  his  protection,  and  resolve 
on  independence.  That  their  proceedings  might  be  in  due 
form,  a  sub-committee,  consisting  of  Doctor  Ephraim 


256  Appendix  of  Documents 

Brevard,  a  Mr.  Kennon,  an  attorney,  and  a  third  person, 
whom  I  do  not  recollect,  were  appointed  to  draft  their 
Declaration.  They  retired  from  the  court  house  for  some 
time;  but  the  committee  continued  in  session  in  it.  One 
circumstance  occurred  I  distinctly  remember:  A  member 
of  the  committee,  who  had  said  but  little  before,  addressed 
the  Chairman  as  follows:  "  If  you  resolve  on  independence, 
how  shall  we  all  be  absolved  from  the  obligations  of  the 
oath  we  took  to  be  true  to  King  George  the  3d  about  four 
years  ago,  after  the  Regulation  battle,  when  we  were  sworn 
whole  militia  companies  together.  I  should  be  glad  to 
know  how  gentlemen  can  clear  their  consciences  after  taking 
that  oath."  This  speech  produced  confusion.  The  Chair 
man  could  scarcely  preserve  order,  so  many  wished  to 
reply.  There  appeared  great  indignation  and  contempt  at 
the  speech  of  the  member.  Some  said  it  was  nonsense ; 
others  that  allegiance  and  protection  were  reciprocal ;  when 
protection  was  withdrawn,  allegiance  ceased;  that  the 
oath  was  only  binding  while  the  King  protected  us  in  the 
enjoyment  of  our  rights  and  liberties  as  they  existed  at  the 
time  it  was  taken;  which  he  had  not  done,  but  now  de 
clared  us  out  of  his  protection ;  therefore  was  not  binding. 
Any  man  who  would  interpret  it  otherwise,  was  a  fool. 
By  way  of  illustration,  (pointing  to  a  green  tree  near  the 
court  house,)  stated,  if  he  was  sworn  to  do  any  thing  as 
long  as  the  leaves  continued  on  that  tree,  it  was  so  long 
binding;  but  when  the  leaves  fell,  he  was  discharged  from 
its  obligation.  This  was  said  to  be  certainly  applicable 
in  the  present  case.  Out  of  respect  for  a  worthy  citizen, 
long  since  deceased,  and  his  respectable  connexions,  I 
forbear  to  mention  names;  for,  though  he  was  a  friend  to 
the  cause,  a  suspicion  rested  on  him  in  the  public  mind 
for  some  time  after. 

The  sub-committee  appointed  to  draft  the  resolutions 
returned,  and  Doctor  Ephraim  Brevard  read  their  report, 
as  near  as  I  can  recollect,  in  the  very  words  we  have  since 
seen  them  several  times  in  print.  It  was  unanimously 


State   Pamphlet  257 

adopted,  and  shortly  after  it  was  moved  and  seconded  to 
have  proclamation  made  and  the  people  collected,  that 
the  proceedings  be  read  at  the  court  house  door,  in  order 
that  all  might  hear  them.  It  was  done,  and  they  were 
received  with  enthusiasm.  It  was  then  proposed  by  some 
one  aloud  to  give  three  cheers  and  throw  up  their  hats. 
It  was  immediately  adopted,  and  the  hats  thrown.  Several 
of  them  lit  on  the  court  house  roof.  The  owners  had  some 
difficulty  to  reclaim  them. 

The  foregoing  is  all  from  personal  knowledge.  I  under 
stood  afterwards  that  Captain  James  Jack,  then  of  Char 
lotte,  undertook,  on  the  request  of  the  committee,  to  carry 
a  copy  of  their  proceedings  to  Congress,  which  then  sat 
in  Philadelphia ;  and  on  his  way,  at  Salisbury,  the  time  of 
court,  Mr.  Kennon,  who  was  one  of  the  committee  who 
assisted  in  drawing  the  Declaration,  prevailed  on  Captain 
Jack  to  get  his  papers,  and  have  them  read  publicly ;  which 
was  done,  and  the  proceedings  met  with  general  approba 
tion.  But  two  of  the  Lawyers,  John  Dunn  and  a  Mr.  Booth, 
dissented,  and  asserted  they  were  treasonable,  and  en 
deavored  to  have  Captain  Jack  detained.  He  drew  his 
pistols,  and  threatened  to  kill  the  first  man  who  would 
interrupt  him,  and  passed  on.  The  news  of  this  reached 
Charlotte  in  a  short  time  after,  and  the  executive  of  the 
committee,  whom  they  had  invested  with  suitable  powers, 
ordered  a  party  of  ten  or  twelve  armed  horsemen  to  bring 
said  Lawyers  from  Salisbury;  when  they  were  brought, 
and  the  case  investigated  before  the  committee.  Dunn,  on 
giving  security  and  making  fair  promises,  was  permitted 
to  return,  and  Booth  was  sentenced  to  go  to  Camden,  in 
South  Carolina,  out  of  the  sphere  of  his  influence.  My 
brother  George  Graham  and  the  late  Col.  John  Carruth 
were  of  the  party  that  went  to  Salisbury;  and  it  is  dis 
tinctly  remembered  that  when  in  Charlotte  they  came  home 
at  night,  in  order  to  provide  for  their  trip  to  Camden;  and 
that  they  and  two  others  of  the  party  took  Booth  to  that 
place.  This  was  the  first  military  expedition  from  Meck- 
17 


258  Appendix  of  Documents 

lenburg  in  the  Revolutionary  war,  and  believed  to  be  the 
first  any  where  to  the  South. 

Yours  respectfully. 

J.  GRAHAM. 
DR.  Jos.  M'Kx.  ALEXANDER. 

Mecklenburg,  N.  Carolina. 


EXTRACT  FROM  THE  MEMOIR  OF  THE  LATE  REV.    HUMPHREY 

HUNTER. 

Orders  were  presently  issued  by  Col.  Thos.  Polk  to  the 
several  militia  companies,  that  two  men,  selected  from  each 
corps,  should  meet  at  the  Court-House  on  the  iQth  of  May, 
1 7  7  5 ,  in  order  to  consult  with  each  other  upon  such  measures 
as  might  be  thought  best  to  be  pursued.  Accordingly,  on 
said  day  a  far  larger  number  than  two  out  of  each  company 
were  present.  There  was  some  difficulty  in  choosing  the 
commissioners.  To  have  chosen  all  thought  to  be  worthy, 
would  have  rendered  the  meeting  too  numerous.  The 
following  were  selected,  and  styled  Delegates,  and  are  here 
given,  according  to  my  best  recollection,  as  they  were 
placed  on  roll:  Abram  Alexander,  sen'r,  Thomas  Polk, 
Rich'd  Harris,  sen'r,  Adam  Alexander,  Richard  Barry, 
John  M'Knit  Alexander,  Neil  Morison,  Hezekiah  Alexander, 
Hezekiah  J.  Balch,  Zacheus  Wilson,  John  Phifer,  James 
Harris,  William  Kennon,  John  Ford,  Henry  Downs,  Ezra 
Alexander,  William  Graham,  John  Queary,  Chas.  Alex 
ander,  Waitstill  Avery,  Ephraim  Brevard,  Benjamin 
Patton,  Matthew  M'Clure,  Robert  Irwin,  John  Flenniken, 
and  David  Reese. 

Abram  Alexander  was  nominated,  and  unanimously 
voted  to  the  Chair.  John  M'Knit  Alexander  and  Ephraim 
Brevard  were  chosen  Secretaries.  The  Chair  being  occu 
pied,  and  the  Clerks  seated,  the  House  was  called  to  order 
and  proceeded  to  business.  Then  a  full,  a  free,  and  dis- 


State  Pamphlet  259 

passionate  discussion  obtained  on  the  various  subjects  for 
which  the  delegation  had  been  convened,  and  the  following 
resolutions  were  unanimously  ordained: 

i  st.  Resolved,  That  whosoever  directly  or  indirectly 
abetted,  or  in  any  way,  form  or  manner,  countenanced  the 
unchartered  and  dangerous  invasion  of  our  rights,  as 
claimed  by  Great  Britain,  is  an  enemy  to  this  country,  to 
America,  and  to  the  inherent  and  inalienable  rights  of  man. 

2d.  Resolved,  That  we,  the  citizens  of  Mecklenburg 
county,  do  hereby  dissolve  the  political  bands  which  have 
connected  us  to  the  mother  country,  and  hereby  absolve 
ourselves  from  all  allegiance  to  the  British  Crown,  and 
abjure  all  political  connection,  contract,  or  association, 
with  that  nation,  who  have  wantonly  trampled  on  our 
rights  and  liberties,  and  inhumanly  shed  the  blood  of  Amer 
ican  patriots  at  Lexington. 

3d.  Resolved,  That  we  do  hereby  declare  ourselves  a 
free  and  independent  people;  are,  and  of  right  ought  to 
be,  a  sovereign  and  self-governing  Association,  under  the 
control  of  no  power  other  than  that  of  our  God  and  the 
general  government  of  the  Congress;  to  the  maintenance 
of  which  independence,  we  solemnly  pledge  to  each  other 
our  mutual  co-operation,  our  lives,  our  fortunes,  and  our 
most  sacred  honor. 

4th.  Resolved,  That  as  we  now  acknowledge  the  exist 
ence  and  control  of  no  law  or  legal  officer,  civil  or  military, 
within  this  county,  we  do  hereby  ordain  and  adopt  as  a 
rule  of  life,  all,  each  and  every  of  our  former  laws, — 
wherein,  nevertheless,  the  crown  of  Great  Britain  never 
can  be  considered  as  holding  rights,  privileges,  immunities 
or  authority  therein. 

5th.  Resolved,  That  it  is  further  decreed,  that  all,  each 
and  every  military  officer  in  this  county,  is  hereby  rein 
stated  in  his  former  command  and  authority,  he  acting 
conformably  to  these  regulations.  And  that  every  member 
present,  of  this  delegation,  shall  henceforth  be  a  civil 
officer,  viz.  a  Justice  of  the  Peace,  in  the  character  of  a 


26o  Appendix  of  Documents 

"Committee-man,"  to  issue  process,  hear  and  determine 
all  matters  of  controversy,  according  to  said  adopted  laws, 
and  to  preserve  peace,  union  and  harmony  in  said  county; — 
and  to  use  every  exertion  to  spread  the  love  of  country  and 
fire  of  freedom  throughout  America,  until  a  more  general 
and  organized  government  be  established  in  this  province. 

Those  resolves  having  been  concurred  in,  bye-laws  and 
regulations  for  the  government  of  a  standing  Committee 
of  Public  Safety  were  enacted  and  acknowledged.  Then  a 
select  committee  was  appointed,  to  report  on  the  ensuing 
day  a  full  and  definite  statement  of  grievances,  together 
with  a  more  correct  and  formal  draft  of  the  Declaration  of 
Independence.  The  proceedings  having  been  thus  arranged 
and  somewhat  in  readiness  for  promulgation,  the  Dele 
gation  then  adjourned  until  to-morrow,  at  12  o'clock. 

The  2oth  of  May,  at  12  o'clock,  the  Delegation,  as  above, 
had  convened.  The  select  committee  were  also  present, 
and  reported  agreeably  to  instructions,  viz.  a  statement 
of  grievances  and  formal  draft  of  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  written  by  Ephraim  Brevard,  chairman  of 
said  committee,  and  read  by  him  to  the  Delegation.  The 
resolves,  bye-laws  and  regulations  were  read  by  John 
M'Knitt  Alexander.  It  was  then  announced  from  the 
Chair,  are  you  all  agreed?  There  was  not  a  dissenting 
voice.  Finally,  the  whole  proceedings  were  read  distinctly 
and  audibly,  at  the  Court-House  door,  by  Col.  Thomas 
Polk,  to  a  large,  respectable  and  approving  assemblage 
of  citizens,  who  were  present,  and  gave  sanction  to  the 
business  of  the  day.  A  copy  of  all  those  transactions  were 
then  drawn  off,  and  given  in  charge  to  Capt.  James  Jack, 
then  of  Charlotte,  that  he  should  present  them  to  Congress, 
then  in  session  in  Philadelphia. 

On  that  memorable  day,  I  was  20  years  and  14  days  of 
age,  a  very  deeply  interested  spectator,  recollecting  the 
dire  hand  of  oppression  that  had  driven  me  from  my  native 
clime,  now  pursuing  me  in  this  happy  asylum,  and  seeking 
to  bind  again  in  the  fetters  of  bondage. 


State  Pamphlet  261 

On  the  return  of  Capt.  Jack,  he  reported  that  Congress, 
individually,  manifested  their  entire  approbation  of  the 
conduct  of  the  Mecklenburg  citizens;  but  deemed  it  pre 
mature  to  lay  them  officially  before  the  House. 

NOTE. — The  foregoing  extract  is  copied  from  a  manuscript 
account  of  the  Revolutionary  War  in  the  South,  addressed  by  the 
writer  to  a  friend,  who  had  requested  historical  information  upon 
this  subject.  Mr.  Hunter  was  in  the  battle  of  Cam  den,  and  has 
given  an  interesting  narrative  of  the  circumstances  connected  with 
the  death  of  Baron  De  Kalb.  The  manuscript  gives  the  biography 
of  the  writer,  from  which  it  appears  he  was  a  native  of  Ireland,  and 
born  on  the  i4th  of  May,  1755,  and  at  an  early  age  emigrated  from 
his  native  land  to  the  Province  of  North  Carolina. 

ADDITIONAL  PAPERS, 

NOT  PARTICULARLY  REFERRED  TO  IN  THE  PREFACE. 


FROM  THE  RALEIGH  REGISTER,  OF  FEBRUARY   l8,    1820. 

MECKLENBURG  DECLARATION  OF 
INDEPENDENCE. 

When  this  Declaration  was  first  published  in  April  last,  some  doubts 
were  expressed  in  the  Eastern  papers  as  to  its  authenticity, 
(none  of  the  Histories  of  the  Revolution  having  noticed  the  cir 
cumstance.)  Col.  William  Polk,  of  this  City,  (who,  though  a  mere 
youth  at  the  time,  was  present  at  the  meeting  which  made  the 
Declaration,  and  whose  Father  being  Colonel  of  the  county, 
appears  to  have  acted  a  conspicuous  part  on  the  occasion,) 
observing  this,  assured  us  of  the  correctness  of  the  facts  generally, 
though  he  thought  there  were  errors  as  to  the  name  of  the  Secre 
tary,  &c.,  and  said  that  he  should  probably  be  able  to  correct 
these,  and  throw  some  further  light  on  the  subject,  by  enquiries 
amongst  some  of  his  old  friends  in  Mecklenburg  county.  He 
has  accordingly  made  enquiries,  and  communicated  to  us  the 
following  Documents  as  the  result,  which,  we  presume,  will  do 
away  all  doubts  on  the  subject. 

CERTIFICATE. 
STATE  OF  NORTH-CAROLINA, 

MECKLENBURG  COUNTY. 

At  the  request  of  Col.  William  Polk,  of  Raleigh,  made  to 


262  Appendix  of  Documen 

Major-General  George  Graham,  soliciting  him  to  procure 
all  the  information  that  could  be  obtained  at  this  late 
period,  of  the  transactions  which  took  place  in  the  county 
of  Mecklenburg,  in  the  year  1775,  as  it  respected  the  people 
of  that  county  having  declared  Independence ;  of  the  time 
when  the  Declaration  was  made;  who  were  the  principal 
movers  and  leaders,  and  the  members  who  composed  the 
body  of  Patriots  who  made  the  Declaration,  and  signed 
the  same. 

We,  the  undersigned  citizens  of  the  said  county,  and  of 
the  several  ages  set  forth  opposite  to  each  of  our  names,  do 
certify,  and  on  our  honor  declare,  that  we  were  present  in 
the  town  of  Charlotte,  in  the  said  county  of  Mecklenburg, 
on  the  i pth  day  of  May,  1775,  when  two  persons  elected 
from  each  Captain's  Company  in  said  county,  appeared  as 
Delegates,  to  take  into  consideration  the  state  of  the 
country,  and  to  adopt  such  measures  as  to  them  seemed 
best,  to  secure  their  lives,  liberty,  and  property,  from  the 
storm  which  was  gathering,  and  had  burst  upon  their 
fellow-citizens  to  the  Eastward,  by  a  British  Army,  under 
the  authority  of  the  British  King  and  Parliament. 

The  order  for  the  election  of  Delegates  was  given  by  Col. 
Thomas  Polk,  the  commanding  officer  of  the  militia  of  the 
county,  with  a  request  that  their  powers  should  be  ample, 
touching  any  measure  that  should  be  proposed. 

We  do  further  certify  and  declare,  that  to  the  best  of  our 
recollection  and  belief,  the  delegation  was  complete  from 
every  company,  and  that  the  meeting  took  place  in  the 
Court-House,  about  12  o'clock  on  the  said  iQth  day  of 
May,  1775,  when  Abraham  Alexander  was  chosen  Chairman, 
and  Dr.  Ephraim  Brevard  Secretary.  That  the  Delegates 
continued  in  session  until  in  the  night  of  that  day;  that 
on  the  2oth  they  again  met,  when  a  committee,  under  the 
direction  of  the  Delegates,  had  formed  several  resolves, 
which  were  read,  and  which  went  to  declare  themselves, 
and  the  people  of  Mecklenburg  county,  Free  and  Inde 
pendent  of  the  King  and  Parliament  of  Great  Britain — 


State  Pamphlet  263 

and  that,  from  that  day  henceforth,  all  allegiance  and  po 
litical  relation  was  absolved  between  the  good  people  of 
Mecklenburg,  and  the  King  of  Great  Britain ;  which  Decla 
ration  was  signed  by  every  member  of  the  Delegation, 
under  the  shouts  and  huzzas  of  a  very  large  assembly  of 
the  people  of  the  county,  who  had  come  to  know  the  issue 
of  the  meeting.  We  further  believe,  that  the  Declaration 
of  Independence  was  drawn  up  by  the  Secretary,  Dr. 
Ephraim  Brevard,  and  that  it  was  conceived  and  brought 
about  through  the  instrumentality  and  popularity  of  Col. 
Thomas  Polk,  Abraham  Alexander,  John  M'Knitt  Alexan 
der,  Adam  Alexander,  Ephraim  Brevard,  John  Phifer,  and 
Hezekiah  Alexander,  with  some  others. 

We  do  further  certify  and  declare,  that  in  a  few  days 
after  the  Delegates  adjourned,  Captain  James  Jack,  of  the 
town  of  Charlotte,  was  engaged  to  carry  the  resolves  to  the 
President  of  Congress,  and  to  our  Representatives — one 
copy  for  each;  and  that  his  expenses  were  paid  by  a 
voluntary  subscription.  And  we  do  know  that  Captain 
Jack  executed  the  trust,  and  returned  with  answers,  both 
from  the  President  and  our  Delegates  in  Congress,  expres 
sive  of  their  entire  approbation  of  the  course  that  had  been 
adopted,  recommending  a  continuance  in  the  same;  and 
that  the  time  would  soon  be,  when  the  whole  Continent 
would  follow  our  example. 

We  further  certify  and  declare,  that  the  measures  which 
were  adopted  at  the  time  before  mentioned,  had  a  general 
influence  on  the  people  of  this  county  to  unite  them  in 
the  cause  of  liberty  and  the  country,  at  that  time ;  that  the 
same  unanimity  and  patriotism  continued  unimpaired  to 
the  close  of  the  war;  and  that  the  resolutions  had  con 
siderable  effect  in  harmonising  the  people  in  two  or  three 
adjoining  counties. 

That  a  committee  of  Safety  for  the  county  were  elected, 
who  were  clothed  with  civil  and  military  power,  and  under 
their  authoiity  several  disaffected  persons  in  Rowan,  and 
Tryon  (now  Lincoln  county),  were  sent  for,  examined, 


264  Appendix  of  Documents 

and  conveyed  (after  it  was  satisfactorily  proven  they  were 
inimical)  to  Camden,  in  South  Carolina,  for  safe-keeping. 
We  do  further  certify,  that  the  acts  passed  by  the  com 
mittee  of  Safety,  were  received  as  the  Civil  Law  of  the 
land  in  many  cases,  and  that  Courts  of  Justice  for  the 
decision  of  controversies  between  the  people  were  held, 
and  we  have  no  recollection  that  dissatisfaction  existed 
in  any  instance  with  regard  to  the  judgments  of  said  courts. 
We  are  not,  at  this  late  period,  able  to  give  the  names  of 
all  the  Delegation  who  formed  the  Declaration  of  Inde 
pendence;  but  can  safely  declare  as  to  the  following  per 
sons  being  of  the  number,  viz.  Thomas  Polk,  Abraham 
Alexander,  John  M'Knitt  Alexander,  Adam  Alexander, 
Ephraim  Brevard,  John  Phifer,  Hezekiah  James  Balsh, 
Benjamin  Patton,  Hezekiah  Alexander,  Richard  Barry, 
William  Graham,  Matthew  M'Clure,  Robert  Irwin,  Zachias 
Wilson,  Neil  Morrison,  John  Flenniken,  John  Queary, 
Ezra  Alexander. 

In  testimony  of  all  and  every  part  herein  set  forth,  we 
have  hereunto  set  our  hands. 

GEO.  GRAHAM,  aged  61,  near  62. 

WM.  HUTCHINSON    68. 

JONAS  CLARK  61. 

ROB'T  ROBINSON,     68. 

PROM  JOHN  SIMESON  TO  COL.  WILLIAM  POLK. 

"Providence,  January  20,  1820. 

"Dear  Sir, — After  considerable  delay,  occasioned  partly 
to  obtain  what  information  I  could,  in  addition  to  my  own 
knowledge  of  the  facts  in  relation  to  our  Declaration  of 
Independence,  and  partly  by  a  precarious,  feeble  old  age, 
I  now  write  to  you  in  answer  to  yours  of  the  24th  ult. 

"I  have  conversed  with  many  of  my  old  friends  and 
others,  and  all  agree  in  the  point,  but  few  can  state  the 
particulars;  for  although  our  county  is  renowned  for 
general  intelligence,  we  have  still  some  that  don't  read 


State  Pamphlet  265 

the  public  prints.  You  know,  in  the  language  of  the  day, 
every  Province  had  its  Congress,  and  Mecklenburg  had  its 
county  Congress,  as  legally  chosen  as  any  other,  and 
assumed  an  attitude  until  then  without  a  precedent;  but, 
alas!  those  worthies  who  conceived  and  executed  that 
bold  measure,  are  no  more;  and  one  reason  why  so  little 
new  light  can  be  thrown  on  an  old  truth,  may  be  this — 
and  I  appeal  to  yourself  for  the  correctness  of  the  remark — 
we  who  are  now  called  Revolutionary  men,  were  then 
thoughtless,  precipitate  youths;  we  cared  not  who  con 
ceived  the  bold  act,  our  business  was  to  adopt  and  support 
it.  Yourself,  sir,  in  your  eighteenth  year  and  on  the  spot, 
your  worthy  father,  the  most  popular  and  influential 
character  in  the  county,  and  yet  you  cannot  state  much 
from  recollection.  Your  father,  as  commanding  officer  of 
the  county,  issued  orders  to  the  Captains  to  appoint  two 
men  from  each  company  to  represent  them  in  the  commit 
tee. — It  was  done.  Neill  Morrison,  John  Flenniken,  from 
this  company;  Charles  Alexander,  John  M'Knitt  Alexan 
der,  Hezekiah  Alexander,  Abraham  Alexander,  Esq.  John 
Phifer,  David  Reese,  Adam  Alexander,  Dickey  Barry,  John 
Queary,  with  others,  whose  names  I  cannot  obtain.  As  to 
the  names  of  those  who  drew  up  the  Declaration,  I  am  in 
clined  to  think  Doctor  Brevard  was  the  principal,  from 
his  known  talents  in  composition.  It  was,  however,  in 
substance  and  form,  like  that  great  national  act  agreed 
on  thirteen  months  after.  Ours  was  towards  the  close  of 
May,  1775.  In  addition  to  what  I  have  said,  the  same 
committee  appointed  three  men  to  secure  all  the  military 
stores  for  the  county's  use — Thomas  Polk,  John  Phifer, 
and  Joseph  Kennedy.  I  was  under  arms  near  the  head  of 
the  line,  near  Col.  Polk,  and  heard  him  distinctly  read  a 
long  string  of  Grievances,  the  Declaration  and  Military 
Order  above.  I  likewise  heard  Col.  Polk  have  two  warm 
disputes  with  two  men  of  the  county,  who  said  the  measures 
were  rash  and  unnecessary.  He  was  applauded  and  they 
silenced.  I  was  then  in  my  226.  year,  an  enemy  to  usur- 


266  Appendix  of  Documents 

pation  and  tyranny  of  every  kind,  with  a  retentive  memory, 
and  fond  of  liberty,  that  had  a  doubt  arisen  in  my  mind 
that  the  act  would  be  controverted,  proof  would  not  have 
been  wanting;  but  I  comfort  myself  that  none  but  the 
self-important  peace-party  and  blue-lights  of  the  East, 
will  have  the  assurance  to  oppose  it  any  further.  The 
biographer  of  Patrick  Henry  (Mr.  Wirt)  says  he  first  sug 
gested  Independence  in  the  Virginia  Convention;  but  it  is 
known  they  did  not  reduce  it  to  action — so  that  it  will  pass 
for  nothing.  The  Courts  likewise  acted  independently.  I 
myself  heard  a  dispute  take  place  on  the  bench,  and  an 
acting  magistrate  was  actually  taken  and  sent  to  prison 
by  an  order  of  the  Chairman. 

"Thus,  sir,  have  I  thrown  together  all  that  I  can  at  this 
time.  I  am  too  blind  to  write  fair,  and  too  old  to  write 
much  sense — but  if  my  deposition  before  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  would  add  more  weight  to  a 
truth  so  well  known  here,  it  should  be  at  the  service  of  my 
fellow-citizens  of  the  county  and  State  generally. 

"I  am,  sir,  your  friend  and  humble  servant, 

"JOHN  SIMESON,  Sen. 

P.  S.  I  will  give  you  a  short  anecdote.  An  aged  man 
near  me,  on  being  asked  if  he  knew  any  thing  of  this  affair, 
replied,  "Och,  aye,  TAM  POLK  declared  Independence  lang 
before  anybody  else."  This  old  man  is  81. 


CERTIFICATE  OF  ISAAC  ALEXANDER. 

I  hereby  certify  that  I  was  present  in  Charlotte  on  the 
i gth  and  2oth  days  of  May,  1775,  when  a  regular  depu 
tation  from  all  the  Captains'  companies  of  militia  in  the 
county  of  Mecklenburg,  to  wit:  Col.  Thomas  Polk,  Adam 
Alexander,  Lieut.  Col.  Abram  Alexander,  John  M'Knitt 
Alexander,  Hezekiah  Alexander,  Ephraim  Brevard  and  a 
number  of  others,  who  met  to  consult  and  take  measures 
for  the  peace  and  tranquillity  of  the  citizens  of  said  county, 


State  Pamphlet  267 

and  who  appointed  Abraham  Alexander  their  Chairman, 
and  Doctor  Ephraim  Brevard  Secretary;  who,  after  due 
consultation,  declared  themselves  absolved  from  their 
allegiance  to  the  King  of  Great  Britain,  and  drew  up  a 
Declaration  of  their  Independence,  which  was  unanimously 
adopted;  and  employed  Capt.  James  Jack  to  carry  copies 
thereof  to  Congress,  who  accordingly  went.  These  are  a 
part  of  the  transactions  that  took  place  at  that  time,  as 
far  as  my  recollection  serves  me. 

ISAAC  ALEXANDER. 

October  8,  1830. 

CERTIFICATE  OF  SAM*L  WILSON. 

STATE  OF  NORTH  CAROLINA, ) 
MECKLENBURG  COUNTY.  f 

I  do  hereby  certify,  that  in  May,  1775,  a  committee  or 
delegation  from  the  different  militia  companies  in  this 
county,  met  in  Charlotte;  and  after  consulting  together, 
they  publicly  declared  their  independence  on  Great  Britain, 
and  on  her  Government.  This  was  done  before  a  large 
collection  of  people,  who  highly  approved  of  it.  I  was  then 
and  there  present,  and  heard  it  read  from  the  Court  House 
door.  Certified  by  me. 

SAM'L  WILSON. 

CERTIFICATE  OF  JOHN  DAVIDSON. 

Beaver  Dam,  October  5,  1830. 

DEAR  SIR, — I  received  your  note  of  the  25th  of  last 
month,  requiring  information  relative  to  the  Mecklenburg 
Declaration  of  Independence.  As  I  am,  perhaps,  the  only 
person  living,  who  was  a  member  of  that  Convention,  and 
being  far  advanced  in  years,  and  not  having  my  mind  fre 
quently  directed  to  that  circumstance  for  some  years,  I 
can  give  you  but  a  very  succinct  history  of  that  transaction. 
There  were  two  men  chosen  from  each  Captain's  company, 


268  Appendix  of  Documents 

to  meet  in  Charlotte,  to  take  the  subject  into  consideration. 
John  M'Knitt  Alexander  and  myself  were  chosen  from  one 
company;  and  many  other  members  were  there  that  I 
now  recollect,  whose  names  I  deem  unnecessary  to  mention. 
When  the  members  met,  and  were  perfectly  organized  for 
business,  a  motion  was  made  to  declare  ourselves  inde 
pendent  of  the  Crown  of  Great  Britain,  which  was  carried 
by  a  large  majority.  Dr.  Ephraim  Brevard  was  then  ap 
pointed  to  give  us  a  sketch  of  the  Declaration  of  Independ 
ence,  which  he  did.  James  Jack  was  appointed  to  take  it 
on  to  the  American  Congress,  then  sitting  in  Philadelphia, 
with  particular  instructions  to  deliver  it  to  the  North 
Carolina  Delegation  in  Congress,  (Hooper  and  Caswell.) 
When  Jack  returned,  he  stated  that  the  Declaration  was 
presented  to  Congress,  and  the  reply  was,  that  they  highly 
esteemed  the  patriotism  of  the  citizens  of  Mecklenburg; 
but  they  thought  the  measure  too  premature. 

I  am  confident  that  the  Declaration  of  Independence  by 
the  people  of  Mecklenburg  was  made  public  at  least  twelve 
months  before  that  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States. 

I  do  certify  that  the  foregoing  statement,  relative  to 
the  Mecklenburg  Independence,  is  correct,  and  which  I 
am  willing  to  be  qualified  to,  should  it  be  required. 
Yours  respectfully, 

JOHN  DAVIDSON. 
Doct.  J.  M.  ALEXANDER. 

NOTE. — The  following  is  a  copy  of  an  original  paper  furnished  by 
the  writer  of  the  foregoing  certificate,  from  which  it  would  seem, 
that  from  the  period  of  the  Mecklenburg  Declaration,  every  indi 
vidual  friendly  to  the  American  cause  was  furnished  by  the  Chair- 
man  of  that  meeting,  ABRAM  ALEXANDER,  with  testimonials  of  the 
character  he  had  assumed;  and  in  this  point  of  view  the  paper 
affords  strong  collateral  testimony  of  the  correctness  of  many  of 
the  foregoing  certificates. 

NORTH  CAROLINA,  MECKLENBURG  COUNTY,  ) 
November  28,  1775.        J 

These  may  certify  to  all  whom  they  may  concern,  that  the  bearer 


State  Pamphlet  269 

hereof,  William  Henderson,  is  allowed  here  to  be  a  true  friend  to 
liberty,  and  signed  the  Association. 

Certified  by  ABR'M  ALEXANDER,  Chairman 

of  the  Committee  of  P.  S. 


LETTER  PROM  J.  G.  M.  RAMSEY. 

Mecklenburg,  T.  Oct.  1/1830. 

DEAR  SIR, — Yours  of  2ist  ultimo  was  duly  received.  In 
answer  I  have  only  to  say,  that  little  is  in  my  possession 
on  the  subject  alluded  to  which  you  have  not  already  seen. 
Subjoined  are  the  certificates  of  two  gentlemen  of  this 
county,  whose  respectability  and  veracity  are  attested 
by  their  acquaintances  here,  as  well  as  by  the  accompany 
ing  testimonials  of  the  magistrates  in  whose  neighborhood 
they  reside.  With  this  you  will  also  receive  extracts  from 
letters  on  the  same  subject  from  gentlemen  well  known  to 
you,  and  to  the  country  at  large. 

I  am,  very  respectfully,  yours,  &c. 

J.  G.  M.  RAMSEY. 


CERTIFICATE  OF  JAMES  JOHNSON. 

I,  James  Johnson,  now  of  Knox  county,  Tennessee,  but 
formerly  of  Mecklenburg  county,  North  Carolina,  do  here 
by  certify,  that  to  the  best  of  my  recollection,  in  the 
month  of  May,  1775,  there  were  several  meetings  in  Char 
lotte  concerning  the  impending  war.  Being  young,  I  was 
not  called  on  to  take  an  active  part  in  the  same;  but 
one  thing  I  do  positively  remember,  that  she  (Mecklen 
burg  county)  did  meet  and  hold  a  Convention,  declared 
independence,  and  sent  a  man  to  Philadelphia  with  the 
proceedings.  And  I  do  further  certify,  that  I  am  well  ac 
quainted  with  several  of  the  men  who  formed  or  constituted 
said  Convention,  viz.  John  M'Knitt  Alexander,  Hezekiah 


2/o  Appendix  of  Documents 

Alexander,  Abraham  Alexander,  Adam  Alexander,  Robert 
Irwin,  Neill  Morrison,  John  Flenniken,  John  Queary. 
Certified  by  me  this  nth  day  of  October,  1827. 

JAMES  JOHNSON. 
In  my  seventy-third  year. 


CERTIFICATE  OP  ELIJAH  JOHNSON  AND  JAMES  WILHITE. 

We,  Elijah  Johnson  and  James  Wilhite,  acting  Justices 
of  the  Peace  for  the  county  of  Knox,  do  certify,  that  we 
have  been  a  long  time  well  acquainted  with  Samuel  Mont 
gomery  and  James  Johnson,  both  residents  of  Knox  county ; 
and  that  they  are  entitled  to  full  credit,  and  any  statement 
they  may  make  to  implicit  confidence. 

Given  under  our  hands  and  seals  this  4th  day  of  October 
1830. 

ELIJAH  JOHNSON,  (Seal.) 
JAMES  WILHITE,  (Seal.) 
Justices  of  the  Peace  for  Knox  county. 

NOTE. — Mr.  Montgomery's  certificate  does  not  purport  to  state 
the  facts  as  having  come  under  his  own  personal  observation  It 
is  therefore  omitted  in  this  publication. 


c. 

THE     MECKLENBURG    RESOLVES    AS     PRINTED     IN     THE 
NORTH-CAROLINA  GAZETTE  OF  JUNE  16,  1775,  No.  323.* 

Charlotte  Town,  Mecklenburg  County,  May  31. 
This  Day  the  COMMITTEE  met,  and  passed  the  following 
RESOLVES: 

WHEREAS  by  an  Address  presented  to  his  Majesty 
by  both  Houses  of  Parliament  in  February  last,  the  Amer 
ican  Colonies  are  declared  to  be  in  a  State  of  actual  Re 
bellion,  we  conceive  that  all  Laws  and  Commissions  con 
firmed  by,  or  derived  from  the  Authority  of  the  King  or 
Parliament,  are  annulled  and  vacated,  and  the  former 
civil  Constitution  of  these  Colonies  for  the  present  wholly 
suspended.  To  provide  in  some  Degree  for  the  Exigencies 
of  the  County  in  the  present  alarming  Period,  we  deem 
it  proper  and  necessary  to  pass  the  following  RESOLVES,  viz. 

1.  That  all  Commissions,  civil  and  military,  heretofore 
granted  by  the  Crown,  to  be  exercised  in  these  Colonies, 
are  null  and  void,  and  the  Constitution  of  each  particular 
Colony  wholly  suspended. 

2.  That    the    Provincial    Congress   of    each    Province, 
under  the  Direction  of  the   Great  Continental   Congress, 
is    invested    with    all     legislative   and    executive    Powers 
within    their   respective    Provinces;     and    that    no    other 
Legislative  or  Executive  does  or  can  exist,  at  this  Time, 
in  any  of  these  Colonies. 

3.  As  all  former  Laws  are  now  suspended  in  this  Pro 
vince,  and  the  Congress  have  not  yet  provided  others,  we 

1  From  a  photograph  of  the  original  newspaper. 
271 


272  Appendix  of  Documents 

judge  it  necessary,  for  the  better  Preservation  of  good 
Order,  to  form  certain  Rules  and  Regulations  for  the 
internal  Government  of  this  County,  until  Laws  shall  be 
provided  for  us  by  the  Congress. 

4.  That  the  Inhabitants  of  this  County  do  meet  on  a 
certain  Day  appointed  by  this  Committee,   and  having 
formed  themselves  into  nine  Companies,  to  wit,  eight  for 
the  County,  and  one  for  the  Town  of  Charlotte,  do  choose 
a  Colonel,  and  other  military  Officers,  who  shall  hold  and 
exercise  their  several  Powers  by  Virtue  of  this  Choice, 
and  independent  of  Great-Britain,  and  former  Constitution 
of  this  Province. 

5.  That  for  the  better  Preservation  of  the  Peace,  and 
Administration  of  Justice,  each  of  these  Companies  do 
choose  from  their  own   Body  two  discreet   Freeholders, 
who  shall  be  impowered  each  by  himself,  and  singly,  to 
decide  and  determine  all  Matters  of  Controversy  arising 
within  the  said  Company  under  the  Sum  of  Twenty  Shillings, 
and  jointly  and  together  all  Controversies  under  the  Sum 
of  Forty  Shillings,  yet  so  as  their  Decisions  may  admit  of 
Appeals  to  the  Convention  of  the  Select  Men  of  the  whole 
County;  and  also,  that  any  one  of  these  shall  have  Power 
to  examine,  and  commit  to  Confinement,  Persons  accused 
of  Petit  Larceny. 

6.  That  those  two  Select  Men,  thus  chosen,  do,  jointly 
and  together,  choose  from  the  Body  of  their  particular 
Company   two    Persons,    properly   qualified    to    serve    as 
Constables,  who  may  assist  them  in  the  Execution  of  their 
Office. 

7.  That  upon  the  Complaint  of  any  Person  to  either  of 
these  Select  Men,  he  do  issue  his  Warrant,  directed  to  the 
Constable,  commanding  him  to  bring  the  Aggressor  before 
him  or  them  to  answer  the  said  Complaint. 

8.  That  these  eighteen   Select   Men,  thus  appointed, 
do  meet  every  third   Tuesday  in  January,  April,   July, 
and  October,  at  the  Court-House  in  Charlotte,  to  hear  and 
determine  all  Matters  of  Controversy  for  Sums  exceeding 


North  Carolina  Gazette  Resolves     273 

Forty  Shillings;  also  Appeals:  And  in  Cases  of  Felony, 
to  commit  the  Person  or  Persons  convicted  thereof  to 
close  Confinement,  until  the  Provincial  Congress  shall 
provide  and  establish  Laws  and  Modes  of  Proceeding  in 
such  Cases. 

9.  That  these  Eighteen  Select  Men,  thus  convened,  do 
choose  a  Clerk  to  record  the  Transactions   of  the  said 
Convention ;  and  that  the  said  Clerk,  upon  the  Application 
of  any  Person  or  Persons  aggrieved,  do  issue  his  Warrant 
to  one  of  the  Constables,  to  summons  and  warn  the  said 
Offender  to  appear  before  the  Convention  at  their  next 
sitting,  to  answer  the  aforesaid  Complaint. 

10.  That  any  Person  making  Complaint  upon  Oath  to 
the  Clerk,  or  any  Member  of  the  Convention,  that  he  has 
Reason  to  suspect  that  any  Person  or  Persons  indebted  to 
him  in  a  Sum  above  Forty  Shillings,  do  intend  clandestinely 
to  withdraw  from  the  County  without  paying  such  Debt; 
the  Clerk,  or  such  Member,  shall  issue  his  Warrant  to  the 
Constable,  commanding  him  to  take  the  said  Person  or 
Persons  into  safe  Custody,  until  the  next  sitting  of  the 
Convention. 

1 1 .  That  when  a  Debtor  for  a  Sum  below  Forty  Shillings 
shall  abscond  and  leave  the  County,  the  Warrant  granted 
as  aforesaid  shall  extend  to  any  Goods  or  Chattels  of  the 
said  Debtor  as  may  be  found,  and  such  Goods  or  Chattels 
be  seized  and  held  in  Custody  by  the  Constable  for  the 
Space  of  Thirty  Days;   in  which  Term  if  the  Debtor  fails 
to  return  and  discharge  the  Debt,   the  Constable  shall 
return  the  Warrant  to  one  of  the  Select  Men  of  the  Company 
where  the  Goods  and  Chattels  were  found,  who  shall  issue 
Orders  to  the  Constable  to  sell  such  a  Part  of  the  said 
Goods  as  shall  amount  to  the  Sum  due;   that  when  the 
Debt  exceeds  Forty  Shillings,  the  Return  shall  be  made 
to  the  Convention,  who  shall  issue  the  Orders  for  Sale. 

12.  That  Receivers  and  Collectors  for  Quitrents,  Public 
and  County  Taxes,  do  pay  the  same  into  the  Hands  of  the 
Chairman  of  this  Committee,  to  be  by  them  disbursed  as 


274  Appendix  of  Documents 

the  public  Exigencies  may  require.  And  that  such  Re 
ceivers  and  Collectors  proceed  no  farther  in  their  Office 
until  they  be  approved  of  by,  and  have  given  to  this  Com 
mittee  good  and  sufficient  Security  for  a  faithful  Return 
of  such  Monies  when  collected. 

13.  That  the  Committee  be  accountable  to  the  County 
for  the  Application  of  all  Monies  received  from  such  Officers. 

14.  That    all    these    Officers    hold    their    Commissions 
during  the  Pleasure  of  their  respective  Constituents. 

15.  That  this  Committee  will  sustain  all  Damages  that 
may  ever  hereafter  accrue  to  all  or  any  of  these  Officers 
thus   appointed,   and   thus   acting,   on   Account   of   their 
Obedience  and  Conformity  to  these  Resolves. 

1 6.  That   whatever   Person   shall   hereafter   receive   a 
Commission  from  the  Crown,  or  attempt  to  exercise  any 
such   Commission   heretofore   received,    shall   be   deemed 
an  Enemy  to  his  Country;    and  upon  Information  being 
made  to  the  Captain  of  the  Company  where  he  resides 
the5  said  Captain  shall  cause  him  to  be  apprehended,  and 
conveyed  before  the  two  Select  Men  of  the  said  Company, 
who,  upon  Proof  of  the  Fact,  shall  commit  him  the  said 
Offender  into  safe  Custody,  until  the  next  sitting  of  the 
Convention,  who   shall    deal   with  him  as  Prudence  may 
direct. 

17.  That  any  Person  refusing  to  yield  Obedience  to  the 
above    Resolves   shall   be   deemed  equally  criminal,    and 
liable  to   the  same  Punishments   as  the  Offenders  above 
last  mentioned. 

1 8.  That  these  Resolves  be  in  r  ill  Force  and  Virtue, 
until    Instructions    from    the    Geneial    Congress    of    this 
Province,  regulating  the  Jurisprudence  of  this  Province, 
shall  provide  otherwise,  or  the  Legislative  Body  of  Great- 
Britain  resign  its  unjust  and  arbitrary  Pretensions  with 
Respect  to  America. 

19.  That  the  several  Militia  Companies  in  this  county 
do  provide  themselves  with  proper  Arms  and  Accoutre 
ments,    and   hold   themselves   in   constant    Readiness   to 


North  Carolina  Gazette  Resolves      275 

execute  the  commands  and  Directions  of  the  Provincial 
Congress,  and  of  this  committee. 

20.  That  this  committee  do  appoint  Colonel  Thomas 
Polk,  and  Doctor  Joseph  Kennedy,  to  purchase  300  Ib.  of 
Powder,  600  Ib.  of  Lead,  and  1000  Flints;  and  deposit 
the  same  in  some  safe  Place,  hereafter  to  be  appointed  by 
the  committee. 

Signed  by  Order  of  the  Committee. 
EPH.   BREVARD,  Clerk  of  the  Committee. 

The  North-Carolina  Gazette  of  June  16,  1775, 
from  which  the  foregoing  resolves  are  copied,  was 
recently  found  by  Mr.  Edward  P.  Moses,  of  Raleigh, 
in  the  library  of  Hayes,  the  residence  of  Samuel 
Johnston,  the  Revolutionary  statesman,  near 
Edenton,  N.  C.  Mr.  Moses  found  with  it  a  letter 
of  Richard  Cogdell,  chairman  of  the  Craven  county 
Committee,  dated  New  Bern,  June  18,  1775.  The 
newspaper  was  undoubtedly  enclosed  in  this 
letter,  which  bears  internal  evidence  of  having 
been  addressed  to  Richard  Caswell,  at  Philadel 
phia.  Cogdell  writes  that  the  Craven  Committee 
has  put  into  execution  measures  similar  to  those 
recommended  by  Caswell.  *  *  We  have  Transmited 
the  Copy  of  Our  proceedings,"  he  says,  "to  every 
County  &  Town  in  the  Province,  and  have  had 
the  pleasure  to  hear  many  Counties  have  adopted 
the  Same.  Our  County  of  Craven  have  had  their 
private  musters  and  Ellected  their  Officers.  .  .  . 
you'l  Observe  the  Mecklinburg  Resolves,  exceeds 
all  other  Committees,  or  the  Congress  itself.  I 
Send  you  the  paper,  wherein  they  are  inserted  as 
I  hope  this  will  come  Soon  to  hand." 


D. 

TRANSCRIPT  OF  THE  MECKLENBURG  RESOLVES  IN  THE 
CAPE-FEAR  MERCURY  OF  JUNE  23,  1775,  SENT  IN 
GOVERNOR  MARTIN'S  DUPLICATE  LETTER  OF  JUNE 
30,  1775,  TO  LORD  DARTMOUTH.1 

North  Carolina — Charlotte  Town — Mecklenburgh  County 
This  day  the  Committee  of  ys  County  met  and  passed 
the  following  resolves.  Whereas  by  an  address  presented 
to  His  Majesty  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament  in  February 
last,  the  Americans  are  declared  Rebels,  We  conceive  that 
all  the  laws  and  Commissions  Conferred  by  or  derived  from 
the  authority  of  the  King  or  Parliament  are  Annulled  and 
void,  and  the  former  Constitution  of  the  Colonies  for  the 
present  wholly  Suspended — To  provide  in  some  degree 
for  the  exigencies  of  this  County  in  this  Alarming  Situation, 
We  deem  it  proper  and  Necessary  to  pass  the  following 

Resolves. 

Resolved 

ist  That  all  Commissions  Civil  and  Military  heretofore 
granted  by  the  Crown  to  be  exercised  in  this  Colony  to  be 
Null  and  Void,  and  the  Constitution  of  each  particular 
Colony  wholly  Suspended — 

2d  That  the  provincial  Congress  of  each  province  under 
the  direction  of  the  Great  Continental  Congress  is  invested 
with  all  the  legislative  and  Executive  Authority  with  their 
respective  provinces,  and  that  no  legislative  or  Executive 
power  does  or  can  Exist  at  this  time  in  any  of  their  Colonies. 
3?  As  all  former  laws  are  now  Suspended  in  this  Province 

1  From  the  original  manuscript  in  the  possession  of  the  Earl  of 
Dartmouth. 

276 


Cape  Fear  Mercury  Resolves         277 

and  the  Congress  have  not  yet  provided  others,  we  judge 
it  necessary  for  the  better  preservation  of  good  order  to 
perform  good  rules  &  Regulations  for  the  internal  Govern 
ment  of  this  County  untill  laws  shall  be  provided  for  us 
by  the  Congress. 

4th  That  the  Inhabitants  of  this  County  do  meet  on  a 
certain  day  appointed  by  the  Committee,  and  having 
formed  themselves  into  9  Companies,  Viz.  8  in  the  County 
and  i  in  the  Town  of  Charlotte  do  chuse  a  Colonel  &  other 
Malitia  officers,  who  shall  hold  and  Exercise  their  Several 
Powers  by  virtue  of  this  Choice  and  independant  of  the 
Crown  of  Great  Britain  and  the  former  Constitution  of  this 
Province. 

5th  That  for  the  better  preservation  of  the  Peace  and 
Administration  of  Justice,  Each  of  their  Companies  do 
Chuse  from  their  own  body  two  discreet  Freeholders  who 
shall  be  empowered  each  by  himself  and  singly  to  decide 
and  determine  all  Matters  of  Controversy,  arising  within 
the  Said  Company  under  the  Sum  of  Twenty  Shillings 
and  jointly  all  Controversies  under  40,  yet  so  as  their 
Decision  may  admit  of  an  appeal  to  the  Convention  of 
the  Select  Men  of  the  whole  County,  and  also  that  any  one 
of  these  men  have  power  to  Examine  &  Commit  to  Con 
finement  persons  accused  of  Petty  Larceny. 
6th  That  these  two  Select  Men  thus  chosen  do  jointly  and 
together  chuse  from  the  Body  of  their  particular  Company 
two  persons  properly  qualified  to  act  as  Constables  who 
may  assist  them  in  the  Execution  of  their  office. 
7th  That  upon  the  Complaint  to  either  of  these  Select 
Men  do  issue  their  Warrant  directed  to  the  Constable  to 
bring  the  Aggressor  before  him  or  them  to  answer  the  Said 
Complaint. 

8th  That  these  Eighteen  Select  Men  thus  Appointed 
do  meet  every  third  Tuesday  in  Janry,  April,  July  and 
October  at  the  Court  House  in  Charlotte  Town  to  hear 
and  determine  all  Matters  of  Controversies  for  Sums  ex 
ceeding  40  shillings  also  Appeals,  and  in  case  of  Felony 


278  Appendix  of  Documents 

to  commit  their  Person  or  persons  to  close  Confinement 
untill  the  Provincial  Congress  shall  provide  and  Constitute 
Laws  and  mode  of  proceedings  in  such  Cases. 
91?  That  these  eighteen  Select  Men  thus  Convened  do 
chuse  a  Clerk  to  record  the  transactions  of  the  said  Con 
ventions,  and  that  the  Clerk  upon  the  Application  of  any 
Person  or  Persons  aggrieved  do  issue  their  Warrant  to 
one  of  the  Constables  to  summon  and  warn  the  said 
Offender  to  appear  before  the  said  Convention  at  their 
next  meeting  to  answer  the  aforesaid  Complaint. 

lo1?1  That  any  person  making  Complaint  upon  oath 
to  the  Clerk  or  any  member  of  the  Convention  that  he  has 
reason  to  Suspect  that  any  Person  or  Persons  indebted 
to  him  in  a  Sum  above  40  shillings  do  intend  Clandestinely 
to  withdraw  from  the  County  without  paying  such  Debt, 
the  Clerk  or  such  Member  shall  issue  his  Warrant  to  the 
Constable  commanding  him  to  take  the  said  Person  or 
Persons  into  safe  Custody  untill  the  next  Sitting  of  the 
Convention. 

n^1  That  when  a  Debtor  in  a  Sum  under  40^  shall  abscond 
and  leave  the  County,  the  Warrant  granted  as  aforesaid 
shall  extend  to  any  Goods  or  Chatties  of  the  said  Debtor 
as  may  be  found,  and  if  such  Goods  or  Chatties  so  seized 
and  held  in  Custody  for  the  Space  of  30  days  in  which  time 
the  Debtor  fail  to  return  and  discharge  the  debt,  the  Con 
stable  shall  return  the  Warrant  to  any  of  the  said  Select 
Men  of  the  Company  where  the  goods  or  Chatties  are  found 
who  shall  issue  orders  to  the  Constable  to  sell  such  a  Part 
of  the  said  Goods  as  shall  amount  to  the  Sum  due,  that 
when  the  Debt  shall  exceed  4osh  the  return  shall  be  made 
to  the  Convention  who  shall  issue  their  Order  for  Sale 
1 2^  That  all  Receivers  and  Collectors  of  Quitrents, 
Publick  &  County  Taxes  do  pay  the  Same  into  the  hand 
of  the  Chairman  of  this  County  to  be  by  them  dispersed 
as  the  Publick  Exigencies  may  require,  and  that  such 
Receivers  and  Collectors  proceed  no  farther  in  their  office 
untill  they  be  approved  off  by,  and  have  given  to  their 


Cape-Fear  Mercury  Resolves          279 

Committee  good  and  sufficient  Security  for  a  faithful 
return  of  such  Money  when  Collected. 

i3th  That  the  Committee  shall  be  accountable  to  the 
County  for  the  Application  of  all  money  received  by  such 
publick  officers. 

1 41?1  That  all  those  officers  shall  hold  their  Commissions 
during  the  Pleasure  of  their  respective  Constituents. 
I51.11  That  this  Committee  shall  satisfy  all  Demands  that 
ever  hereafter  may  accrue  to  all  or  any  of  these  their 
Officers  thus  Appointed  and  thus  Acting  on  account  of 
their  Obedience  in  Conformity  to  these  Resolves. 
1 6th.  That  whatever  Person  shall  hereafter  receive  a  Com 
mission  from  the  Crown  or  Attempt  to  exercise  such 
Commission  heretofore  received  shall  be  deemed  an  Enemy 
to  his  Country,  and  upon  information  being  made  to  the 
Captain  of  the  Company  in  which  he  resides,  the  said 
Captain  shall  cause  him  to  be  apprehended  and  Convey 
him  before  the  two  Select  Men  of  the  s?  Company  who 
upon  the  proof  of  the  Fact  shall  commit  him  the  said 
Offender  to  safe  Custody,  'till  the  next  meeting  of  the 
Convention  who  shall  deal  with  him  as  they  in  their 
Prudence  direct. 

j-^th  That  any  person  refusing  to  yeild  Obedience  to  the 
above  Resolves  shall  be  considered  as  equal  Enemies  and 
liable  to  the  same  punishment  as  the  Offenders  above  last 
mentioned. 

1 8th  That  these  Resolves  shall  be  in  full  force  and  Virtue 
untill  Instructions  from  the  Continental  Congress,  regu 
lating  the  just  proceedings  of  this  province  shall  provide 
otherwise  or  the  legislative  body  of  Great  Britain  resign 
it's  unjust  &  arbitrary  pretentions  with  respect  to  America 
and  no  longer. 

ig^  That  the  several  Malitia  Company  in  this  County 
do  provide  themselves  with  proper  Arms  and  Accoutre 
ments  and  hold  themselves  in  constant  readiness  to 
execute  the  command  and  advice  of  the  General  Congress 
of  this  Province  &  of  this  Committee. 


280  Appendix  of  Documents 

20th  That  the  Committee  Appoint  Colonel  Tho?  Polk  & 
DT  Joseph  Kennedy  to  purchase  3oolbs  of  Gun  Powder  & 
6oolbs  of  Lead  &  1000  flints  for  the  use  of  the  Malitia  in 
this  County  and  deposite  the  Same  in  some  safe  place 
hereafter  to  be  appointed  by  the  Committee  to  be  cautiously 
kept  untill  the  safety  &  defence  of  their  Colony  shall 
require  use  to  make  use  of  it  in  defence  of  our  Country 
and  Liberty. 

Signed  by  order  of  the  Committee 
Ephraim  Brevard 


E. 

COLONEL    WILLIAM    FOLK'S    ACCOUNT    OF    FIRST    REVO 
LUTIONARY  MOVEMENTS  IN  NORTH  CAROLINA. 

The  first  revolutionary  movements  in  this  State  as  far 
as  recollection  serves,  were  almost  simultaneous  throughout 
the  same;  yet  there  were  sections  in  which  the  zeal  for 
the  common  cause  &  opposition  to  the  right  of  G  Britain 
to  impose  taxes  upon  the  Colonies  &  regulate  the  internal 
policy  thereof,  had  taken  deeper  root  and  was  nourished 
by  the  popular  leaders,  so  as  to  take  a  lead  in  the  measures 
to  be  adopted.  It  was  in  the  Sea  Port  towns  the  proposition 
for  a  convention  began,  under  the  influence  of  Harnett, 
Howe,  Hooper,  the  Moores  &  Ashes  at  Wilmington;  Nash, 
Coor,  Leech  &  Cogdell  at  Newbern,  S.  Johnston,  Hughes, 
Harvey  &  others  at  Edenton,  aided  in  the  interior  by 
Caswell,  Blount,  W1:  Hill,  Willie  &  Allen  Jones,  Williams, 
Person,  Penn,  Bourke,  Hart,  Kinchen,  Martin,  Souther- 
land,  Rutherford,  Locke,  Sharpe,  Polk,  Phifer,  Alexanders, 
Spencer,  Wade,  Rowan,  Owen,  Kenon,  Dicksons  &  others. 
The  Convention  met  on  the  27*  of  August  1774  at  Newbern, 
and  appointed  John  Harvey  their  President;  the  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Assembly  under  the  Colonial  Gov-  it  was 
at  this  Convention;  three  Delegates  were  elected  to  meet 
at  Philadelphia  a  general  Congress  from  all  the  States — 
William  Hooper,  Joseph  Hughes  &  R?  Caswell  were 
elected,  and  served  for  one  year;  when  John  Penn  at  a 
Convention  held  at  Hillsb?  Aug*  1775  was  elected  in  the 
place  of  R?  Caswell,  appointed  Treasurer  of  the  Southern 

District. 

281 


282  Appendix  of  Documents 

It  was  not  untill  about  the  meeting  of  the  Delegates  in 
Aug*  1775  the  idea  of  self  government  had  been  entertained 
but  by  a  few  of  the  leading  characters  at  this  Session  there 
was  two  Regiments  of  Infantry  ordered  to  be  raised  on  the 
Continental  establishment — three  Regiments  of  Minute 
men ;  a  Committee  of  safety ;  and  the  members  who  should 
compose  it — regulations  for  the  administration  of  Justice 
under  the  authority  of  the  State  Congress — appointment 
of  Militia  Officers  in  the  several  Counties — means  for  pur 
chasing  powder  lead,  &  making  of  salt  petre.  At  this 
Session  a  Test  was  required  of  each  Member;  professing 
allegiance  to  the  King  and  the  constitutional  po\ver  of  the 
Gov*  ;  but  declaring  at  same  time  most  solemnly  &  abso 
lutely  that  neither  the  Parliment,  nor  any  constitutent 
branch  thereof  have  a  Right  to  impose  taxes;  and  that  all 
attempts  by  fraud  or  force  to  exercise  such  powers  are 
violations  &  ought  to  be  resisted  to  the  utmost:  and  fur 
ther  that  the  People  singly  &  collectively  are  bound  by 
the  Acts  of  the  Continental  &  Provincal  Congresses;  be 
cause  they  are  freely  represented  there  by  persons  of  their 
own  choice — they  further  solemnly  &  sincerly  promise  & 
engage,  under  the  sanction  of  Virtue,  Honour,  &  sacred 
Love  of  liberty  &  Country;  to  maintain  and  support  all  & 
every  act  resolution  &  regulation  of  the  said  Congresses. 
To  this  test  the  Members  present  subscribed,  to  the  number 
of  181;  of  which  number  there  are  only  7  now  living  viz. 
Thomas  Henderson  of  Rockenham,  Jos.  Williams  of  Surry, 
Ransome  Southerland  of  Wake,  Waightstill  Avery  of 
Burke,  James  Houston  of  Iredell  &  Tho*  Gray  &  James 
Glasgow  now  of  Tennessee.  [Here  appear  the  account  of  the 
Mecklenburg  Declaration  and  text  of  the  resolutions  which  are 
reproduced  in  pages  184-193  of  this  volume.]  Such  was  the 
fame  &  energetic  conduct  of  Thomas  Polk  &  John  Phifer  two 
of  the  most  popular  men  in  the  County,  that  the  Council  of 
safety  from  a  knowledge  of  the  enthusiastic  spirit  of  the 
People  &  the  opposition  which  they  had  &  were  still  making 
against  British  encroachments  on  their  liberty  &  of  the 


William  Folk's  Narrative  283 

Influence  these  two  characters  had,  did  on  the  3?  of  March 
1776  commission  them  to  raise  a  Reg*  of  750  men  on  the 
Cont-1  establishment.  At  the  time  Lord  Cornwallis  followed 
his  victory  over  Gates  &  marched  to  Charlotte,  there  was 
not  a  Continental  soldier  nigher  than  Hillsb? — the  People 
of  Mecklenburg,  &  particularly  those  in  the  Town  &  its 
immediate  vicinity  sent  of  their  Wives  &  families  &  after 
having  accompanyed  them  a  few  miles;  returned  &  joined 
their  several  captains  commands  &  hung  night  &  day  on  the 
enemies  lines.  Their  foraging  parties  were  never  permitted 
to  return  to  Camp  without  being  fired  on  from  every  favour 
able  situation — all  intercourse  between  Charlotte  &  Cam- 
den,  the  British  Military  Deposit  in  the  middle  grounds  of 
S?  Carolina,  was  completely  shut  up  &  put  a  stop  to — their 
Picquets  were  fired  on  &  harrassed  every  night — &  in  fine 
there  was  no  communication  between  the  enemes  Posts, 
nor  could  his  Lordship  ascertain  what  force  was  collecting 
against  him — in  this  situation  he  remained  n  days  &  on 
the  night  of  the  12*  he  left  the  place  preciptately,  leaving 
behind  him  more  than  50  Waggons  &  much  Plunder; 
retracing  his  steps  to  within  the  British  lines — whilst  the 
Militia  were  hanging  on  his  rear  &  flanks  in  times,  20.  & 
50 — An  officer  of  the  British  Army  in  writing  to  his  corre 
spondent  in  England,  gives  an  account  of  the  privations 
to  which  the  Army  were  subjected  to  in  Charlotte,  N.  C.  & 
calls  it  the  Hornetts  Nest. 


E. 

COLONEL  WILLIAM  FOLK'S  ACCOUNT  OF  FIRST  REVO 
LUTIONARY  MOVEMENTS  IN  NORTH  CAROLINA. 

The  Resolutions  of  the  Mecklenburg  Delegates,  is  taken 
from  a  manuscript  copy  given  by  Doctor  Jos.  McKnitt 
Alexander  of  Mecklenburg — I  cannot  vouch  for  their 
being  in  the  words  of  the  Committee  who  framed  them; 
but  they  are  essentially  so. 


284  Appendix  of  Documents 

I  had  intended  to  have  given  you  the  names  of  these 
Patriots  who  formed  the  Delegation  &  who  passed  the 
Resolutions,  but  I  have  not  been  fortunate  enough  to 
obtain  the  whole  of  them — At  the  time  this  meeting  took 
place  &  for  years  before  &  after  my  Father  Thomas  Polk 
was  the  most  popular  man  in  the  County,  had  represented 
it  many  years  under  the  Colonial  system  &  was  one  of 
the  first  Delegates  from  the  County  to  the  Provincial 
Congress  &  it  was  almost  altogether  attributal  to  him,  the 
course  that  was  taken  by  the  people  of  that  County  the 
effects  of  which  reached  &  was  felt  in  the  Counties  of 
Rowan,  Iredell  &  Lincoln — 

The  following  are  some  of  the  names  alluded  to — 

Thomas  Polk 

Abraham  Alexander 

Jn?  McKnitt  Alexander 

Ephraim  Brevard 
Rev?  Hezekiah  James  Balch 

Adam  Alexander 

John  Phifer 

James  Harris 

John  Query 

Zacheus  Wilson  Sen* 

Waightstill  Avery 

W"?  Kennon 

John  Ford 

Benj?  Patton. 

When  on  my  way  thro*  Mecklenburg  I  may  procure 
the  bal.  if  so  you  shall  hear  from  me —  W  P 

[Indorsed  by  Col.  Polk: 

"  First  revolutionary 
movements  &  C." 

Indorsed  by  Judge  Murphey: 

"74-75 
published"] 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


RENEWED  BOOKS  ARE  SUBJECT  TO  IMMEDIATE 

DCS*  All 

RETURN  TO  the  circulation  desk  of  any 
University  of  California  Library 
or  to  the 

NORTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 
Bldg.  400,  Richmond  Field  Station 
University  of  California 
Richmond,  CA  94804-4698 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAY: 
2-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling 

(510)642-6753 
1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing  book 

to  NRLF 
Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  day 

prior  to  due  date 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


JUL271992 


LIBRARY,  U 


N°  410001 

E215.9 
Hoyt,  W.H.  H86 

The  Mecklenburg 
declaration  of  inde 
pendence. 


LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
DAVIS 


